The Westbourne Care Home

Staff worked within the principles of the MCA. Appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were in place where required. However, the service had not ensured all conditions attached to 1 person's DoLS authorisation were being met. We have made a recommendation about this.

New staff had been recruited, which meant the home was fully staffed. Overall, staff had been safely recruited, the provider and was in the process of reviewing current policy and procedures. The current registered manager had focused upon supporting and building an effective staff team. People told us they felt safe living at The Westbourne and staff understood their role in safeguarding people.

Overall medicines were managed safely. On the first day of the inspection aspects of the building needed cleaning, this was addressed along with some redecoration during the inspection. A planned refurbishment programme was due to commence at the home. There were no visiting restrictions in place, and we saw various visitors in the home.

Care plans were developed from assessments. However, the level of detail varied and some contained contradictory information, including some around nutritional needs. They did not always contain enough person-centred information about people's individual needs and requirements to guide staff. Managers had already identified this was an area for improvement and actions were underway to amend aspects of the electronic care planning system and to improve regular communication with relatives.

Feedback indicated that due to recent recruitment, overall staffing was more consistent, which was helping to ensure staff knew people well and understood any changes to their needs . Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals.

The provider had a lifestyle manager who was supporting the team to review and develop activities, especially for people who were living with dementia. The provider had a feedback policy in place, overall feedback indicated the registered manager was responsive and acted to address any issues or concerns raised.

Records were not always complete and/or up to date with person centred information and some were contradictory.

The registered manager understood their role and responsibility under the duty of candour. They were open and honest about shortfalls found during the inspection and acknowledged there was ongoing work to build on learning and improvements which had already been made. Staff told us they were well supported and there were some positive examples and compliments about the care provided.

The provider's quality team were supporting the service and were responsive to feedback for ongoing improvement.