Oak House

Oak House is a care home registered to care for six people who have a learning disability. At the time of the inspection six people were using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service reflected the principals of Registering the Right Support guidance, providing person-centred care and support. The service had a homely feel with care and attention to ensuring each person had a bespoke living environment taking into consideration their likes, preferences and sensory needs. There was space for people to spend time alone, and to socialise with others. The service promoted people’s choice, control, independence and inclusion. People’s support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People were safe and protected from avoidable harm and relevant risk assessments were in place. People who used the service communicated to us that they felt safe living in the home. Their relatives we spoke with spoke positively about the standard of care and support their family members received. People's medicines were managed well, and the home was seen to be clean and tidy throughout.

There were enough staff and they had been recruited in a way that helped to keep people safe. There were enough staff on duty to ensure people’s needs were met. New staff received support to help them learn their role. All staff received appropriate training, support and supervision.

People were supported to eat and drink. Where people had specific dietary needs, these were provided for. Communication was effective within the staff team and people were supported to access other healthcare professionals as needed.

People were supported to make day to day choices and decisions about their lives and were able to participate in their hobbies and interests. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff were kind and caring towards people and had developed very strong relationships with them, knowing them well, including their histories, likes and dislikes. People were treated with dignity and respect, they were involved in making daily decisions and encouraged to develop and maintain their independence.

Care plans were personalised and detailed. They included information about people’s preferences and abilities. Staff supported people to participate in a range of activities. There was a focus on treating people with equality. Bespoke techniques were used to involve and empower those with communication difficulties to ensure their voices were heard and valued. There was a system in place to manage complaints.

Leadership and management were of good quality and people who used the service, their relatives and representatives were fully involved in how the service was run and operated. Systems of governance were in place to continually monitor the quality of the service provided and staff felt supported and spoke positively about the registered provider and the registered manager.

Rating at last inspection:

The service was rated good at the last inspection in 2016 (published 17 November 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating awarded at the last inspection.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Oak House is a care home registered to care for people who have a learning disability. Oak House can accommodate up to four people. The Acorns is a separate annexe that accommodates two people.

There was a manager at the service who was in the process of registering with CQC. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Oak House was last inspected on 4 March 2015. Following the inspection the service was rated as Requires Improvement. We found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because there was no robust system in place for staff training to be monitored and there was insufficient oversight to ensure staff had the requisite training for their roles. Also the registered person had not protected people against the risk of abuse or improper treatment. We asked the provider to take action to make improvements and these actions have been completed.

People who used the service communicated to us that they felt safe living in the home. Their relatives spoke positively about the standard of care and support their family member received.

People's medicines were managed well and the home was seen to be clean and tidy throughout.

People received care that was delivered in line with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) because people were supported to make day to day choices and decisions about their lives. Appropriate and timely applications to ensure that restrictions on people’s liberty to leave the home had been made for everyone that needed them.

People enjoyed the food provided and were supported to receive adequate food and drink to remain healthy.

Staff employed at the home had been recruited in a way that helped to keep people safe because thorough checks were completed prior to them being offered a post.

Staff were receiving regular training and supervision so they were skilled and competent to carry out their role.

Staff knew the people they were supporting and provided a personalised service. Support plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care.

We saw people participated in a range of daily activities both in and outside of the home which were meaningful and promoted independence.

People and their relatives had been asked their opinion of the quality of the service via surveys and by the regular meetings with the managers.

Staff said communication in the home was good and they always felt able to make suggestions. There were meetings held for all staff and additional meetings for groups of staff, for example, senior support workers.

People's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. Relatives said about staff, 'They're definitely respectful and polite' and 'They try and give [my relative] choice, they know them, I feel secure that staff are nice.'

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. One person said 'I like living here'. A relative told us 'I'm extremely pleased, I'm happy [my relative] is in the right place and confident they're looked after, its home, not a care home.'

People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. A relative told us, 'I think the staff are trained, they're up on things.'

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

This included observing care, looking at records and talking to staff. We also spoke with the relatives of two people using the service. They told us they were happy with the care provided and had no concerns. They told us where they had raised concerns they had been listened to and the issues dealt with swiftly.

Throughout our visit, we saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used, to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff were able to demonstrate different methods of communicating with people to ensure their wishes and beliefs were respected.

We found medication was administered safely to people. People were given appropriate support, to ensure they had taken their medication as prescribed.