Walfinch Chiswick, Hammersmith & Kensington

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 16 May 2025 (assessment visit 25 October 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   GGood Good

   A very safe service was provided for people, and there enough appropriately recruited, and well-trained staff employed to meet their needs. This meant people were supported to live very safely. Risks to people were thoroughly assessed, monitored, and recorded, by the registered manager, management team, and staff. Accidents, incidents, and safeguarding concerns were reported, investigated, recorded appropriately, and learnt from. Staff were appropriately trained to administer, prompt and support people to take their medicines, when necessary. Infection control procedures were followed.

2. Effective

   GGood Good

   People and their relatives said that highly effective care was provided, They were not subject to discrimination and their equality and diversity needs were well met. The staff were well-trained and supervised. People and their relatives also told us staff provided excellent care in a dedicated, patient manner that was person centred, and focused on and met people’s needs. Staff encouraged people to discuss their health needs, and any changes to them or concerns were passed on to appropriate health care professional partners. This included transitioning of services when people became more dependent as their needs changed. Staff proactively protected people from the risks associated with nutrition and hydration, and people were encouraged to choose healthy and balanced diets that also met their likes, dislikes, and preferences.

3. Caring

   OOutstanding Outstanding

   People were encouraged, and supported by staff to be as independent as possible, and do things for themselves, as much as they wished, and could manage. Staff prioritised supporting them to have choice, control, and make decisions about how their support was provided, and have the best quality of life. This promoted their independence, confidence, promoted minimising social isolation. People and their relatives told us staff provided great care and support in a friendly way, paying attention to small details that made all the difference. Staff acknowledged people’s rights to privacy, dignity and confidentiality, and people said they felt respected. People said staff cared about them, were compassionate, and enthusiastic about the work they did, and people they cared for, and supported.

4. Responsive

   GGood Good

   The registered manager, management team, and staff were very responsive to people’s needs, and assessed, reviewed, and appropriately adjusted their care plans when required. This included any communication needs. People received excellent, person-centred care, were given choices, well supported to make them, and encouraged to follow their routines, and interests. They were also encouraged and supported to maintain social contact with friends and family to maintain their independence, and minimise social isolation. People were given enough suitable, and accurate information about the service to make their own decisions regarding whether they wished to use it. Complaints were recorded, investigated, and people provided with outcomes.

5. Well-led

   OOutstanding Outstanding

   The provider had a very open, honest culture that was responsive, and positive with a management structure that was clearly set out, and available to people using the service, and staff. The vision and values were clear, and easy to understand. Staff understood, followed them, and were aware of their responsibilities and accountability. People, their relatives, and staff said the management style was very positive, approachable, contactable, and professional. They felt valued, and were comfortable raising any concerns they may have. Staff said this approach made them confident, and enabled them to take responsibility for their own conduct. The service quality was frequently, and thoroughly reviewed, and any required changes made to improve the care and support people received. This was conducted in a way that best suited people. The provider had established effective professional working relationships that promoted integrated, joined up working, both internally, and externally to meet people’s needs including those outside its remit. Staff were actively encouraged to contribute ideas, and suggestions to make improvements to the service, staff wellbeing, and for people using the service, individually, and overall. These contributions were recognised, and staff felt valued members of the service.