Westlands

Key findings

We carried out this assessment on 8 and 12 October 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. One relative described Westlands as having “A nice atmosphere, definitely a family atmosphere.”

People were able to express their views through residents’ meetings, surveys and regular key worker meetings. However, we found some records from key worker meetings did not always clearly demonstrate the outcomes people achieved against their goals. This meant it was not always possible to evidence whether the support provided was effective, people’s goals remained meaningful to them or changes were needed to help them achieve their desired outcomes.

Some people had limited disposable funds, which affected their access to paid activities and opportunities in the community. People continued to take part in community and home based activities. Staff described finding free or low cost alternatives based on people’s interests. However, these arrangements were not consistently reflected in key worker records, which made it difficult to evaluate whether people had equitable access to meaningful opportunities or what outcomes they achieved. Leaders had recently introduced video care plans for people to support new members of staff to understand what was important to them.

Staff understood people’s needs, routines and communication preferences. Leaders completed risk assessments for each person based on their individual needs. For example, through assessing the risk of a person leaving the premises without support, leaders had worked with the person and professionals to introduce location enabled devices, personalised response procedures and support arrangements.

People’s health and nutritional needs were assessed using recognised tools and guidance. Relatives expressed they were confident in these arrangements. One relative told us, “The manager has put everything in place and keeps us up to date.” A GP told us staff communicated promptly when concerns arose and were attentive to people’s individual needs.

Staff treated people with kindness and dignity. They promoted independence through adapted equipment, accessible communication and support with daily activities. End-of-life care was highly personalised, enabling people to remain in their home and supporting meaningful funeral and remembrance arrangements. One professional described staff as professional, compassionate and attentive to people’s needs.

Staff monitored people’s health and responded to changes by seeking specialist advice, reviewing support and introducing equipment where required. Relatives gave examples of staff obtaining mobility equipment, providing additional support during mealtimes and accessing healthcare. One said that when support needs increased, “The manager knew they needed extra help and they got it for [person].”

Staff understood how to report accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns. Managers investigated these, reviewed trends and shared learning through bulletins and service communications.

Staffing levels met people’s assessed support arrangements, including one-to-one support where required. Staff received regular supervision, competency checks and training, including training relevant to support autistic people and people with a learning disability.

Leaders supported continuous learning by developing staff champion roles and providing opportunities for staff to complete vocational qualifications and specialist training. Relatives told us they valued the continuity of staff. One relative told us, “I can hear the experienced staff explaining to any new staff and giving advice on what each person needs or likes.”

Westlands was the first service within the provider organisation to introduce electronic medicine administration records. Learning from its implementation informed the rollout across other services. Medicines were administered by training staff and monitored through regular audits. Managers had identified some gaps in temperature records and acknowledged this required improved oversight.

Leadership was visible and approachable. Governance systems included audits, incident analysis, action plans and service development planning. Environmental and fire safety checks were completed, with maintenance and refurbishment improvements planned.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We found that staff and leaders worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen.