CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Westall House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse, there were enough staff, and medicines and equipment were generally managed safely. Inspectors found some gaps in risk assessments, incident learning records and medicine procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training, supported people's health needs and worked with health professionals. Some written capacity assessments did not reflect current legislation, and the removal of walking frames during meals was being reconsidered.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff were exceptionally kind and treated people as individuals. Privacy, dignity, personal choices, family relationships, cultural needs and end of life wishes were strongly supported.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. Activities reflected people's interests and abilities, and complaints were investigated and answered in a timely way.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- The manager and provider showed strong leadership and a clear focus on improvement. They used audits, meetings, feedback and new projects to improve people's experience.
What inspectors found, April 2018
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, personalised support, with some medicine and record-keeping improvements still needed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 and 2 February 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff, a health professional and volunteers. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicine records, staffing, training, accidents, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring, responsive and well-led were Outstanding. Safe and effective were Good. Inspectors found kind staff who knew people very well, personalised care, many activities, strong community links and effective leadership.
The home had improved from Good at the previous inspection. A previous problem about notifying the CQC when there was no registered manager had been corrected. Inspectors still identified some areas to improve, including medicine guidance, risk assessments, incident records and some mental capacity records.
Kind, personal care
Staff knew people very well and adapted support to their wishes, interests and needs. Inspectors found interactions that were personal rather than just task-focused.
“People received exceptionally good care from staff who treated them like part of their extended family and knew them incredibly well.” from the report
Meaningful activities
The home offered a wide range of activities based on people's interests, including reading, music, animals, gardening and links with schools and community groups.
“There was a range of opportunities for people and their families to participate in.” from the report
Respect and choice
People were involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Staff respected privacy, dignity, cultural and religious needs, and personal end of life wishes.
“People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.” from the report
Strong leadership
The manager and provider regularly checked the quality of care and acted on feedback and changing needs. They also supported innovation and community involvement.
“There was a strong emphasis on continual improvement.” from the report
Medicine procedures
needs fixingInspectors said some practices about personal preferences, as-needed medicines and stock checks did not fully match current national guidance.
“Improvements could be made to ensure practices around personal preferences, as required medicine protocols and stock controls were in line with current national guidance.” from the report
Risk records
needs fixingAfter a person spilled a hot drink more than once, the risk assessment had not been updated. The manager said it would be updated to include the measures already being taken.
“On one occasion a person had spilled a hot drink on more than one occasion and their risk assessment had not been updated.” from the report
Learning from incidents
needs fixingThere had been earlier incidents where action was taken but the learning was not recorded. A new system had recently been introduced to improve recording and follow-up.
“There were previous occasions when incidents had occurred and the lessons learnt had not been recorded despite action having been taken.” from the report
Capacity records
needs fixingStaff understood the principles of consent and best-interest decisions, but some written capacity assessments did not reflect current law.
“Written capacity assessments did not always reflect current legislation.” from the report
- 01How have you improved the procedures for as-needed medicines, personal preferences and medicine stock checks?
- 02How do you make sure risk assessments are updated promptly after accidents or repeated incidents?
- 03What new system is now used to record incidents and show the learning from them?
- 04Have all mental capacity assessments been reviewed against current legislation?
- 05How are people's individual interests and end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 April 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Westall House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- April 2018Outstandingcurrent ratingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 March 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.