Archived: Oakwell

We last inspected the service on 10 and 12 February 2016 and found the provider was meeting the fundamental standards of relevant regulations. We rated Oakwell as ‘good.’

Oakwell is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Oakwell can accommodate up to 13 people in one building and provides care for people who experience mental health conditions. At the time of the inspection eight people were in receipt of care from the service.

The registered manager had been in post for over two years and became registered with CQC in December 2016. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like 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. They are also the registered manager for a sister home Coalway Lane and spends half a day in each service every day during the week.

We found the provider had instilled a positive culture within the service which meant people were given every opportunity and were supported through challenging situations. The provider aimed to go the extra mile and never give up, we saw copious amounts of evidence confirming this was the case. Staff were making a difference to people’s wellbeing by working well as a team, in harmony with one another and by sharing the same values and principles. We found that staff tirelessly worked to engage people in recovery programmes and would continue to support people even when they wanted to lead chaotic lifestyles. For instance, one person was reluctant to engage with the service or address their difficulties and although they were not willing to stay at the service staff regularly spoke with them, offered access to facilities so they could attend to their personal care and worked with other professionals to complete welfare checks.

Staff were totally committed to delivering a service which improved the lives of the people who use the service in fulfilling and creative ways. Their drive and passion had created an exceptionally dynamic and vibrant service. Staff focused fully on the goals and aspirations of the people who used it. People told us the service provided care and support that was exceptional. They discussed how staff had supported them to redevelop skills and learn techniques that would reduce the negative impact their mental health conditions may cause. People also told us that the staff had enabled them to rebuild their relationships with family members and this meant a great deal to them.

Staff worked collaboratively with people to assist them to ensure their voices were heard by healthcare professionals. The service was providing treatment on par with that seen in rehabilitation hospital services and people who were receiving treatment on acute mental health wards were referred by their treating team to Oakwell. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of the people and the staff team were very supportive of the registered manager, the providers and of each other. The staff team comprised of eight registered mental health nurses and six support workers. All the staff had received in-depth training around working with people who lived with mental health conditions.

Staff were exceptionally caring and understood how to support and enable individuals to maximise their potential. The service was proactive in providing people with a range of information to assist them to make decisions about their health and wellbeing. People were supported to develop their independent living skills. Staff took on dedicated roles for sourcing and setting up both activities people could do at the service and in the community. They actively supported people to engage in community activities and seek meaningful occupation. Some of the people told us how staff had actively supported them to find employment opportunities. Other people told us how staff had worked with them to enhance their independent living skills, which had led to them moving to less supported accommodation. People were exceptionally complimentary about the staff.

The service's visions and values promoted people's rights to make choices and live a dignified and fulfilled life. This was reflected in the care and support that people received. People were supported to be as independent as possible and could access advocacy services if needed. Procedures were in place to investigate and respond to complaints.

We saw people’s care plans were person centred and had been well assessed. People’s care needs were risk assessed with risk management plans in place and support for staff when they needed it. We found staff ensured the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) requirements were met. We also found that staff ensured the Mental Health Act 1983 (amended 2007) code of practice was followed.

We saw that staff were recruited safely and were given appropriate training before they commenced employment. Staff told us they received regular supervision and annual appraisals. Staff were respected within the organisation and were provided with a comprehensive range of training. We found staff were consistently striving for excellence and the provider supported them to achieve this goal by assisting staff to attend specialist training around working with people who lived with mental health conditions.

Medicines were stored and administered in a safe manner and staff were appropriately trained.

The registered manager had encouraged staff to constantly think about improvements. We found that the management style had led to people who used the service and staff feeling that they were integral and essential partners in the operation of the service. They constantly critically reviewed the quality of the service and routinely identified how they could enhance the service and ensure the staff remained at the forefront of best practice when working with the people who used the service. Their oversight of the service and encouragement of staff to keep abreast of developments and be innovative had led to excellent outcomes for the people who used the service and their relatives.

The provider gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources including people who used the service, their family and friends and external agencies. People made the key decisions about who was employed, the service model, the décor and the range of activities.

This was used to enable the provider to identify where improvement was needed and to sustain continuous improvement in the service.

The registered manager had informed CQC of significant events in a timely way by submitting the required notifications. This meant we could check that appropriate action had been taken

Oakwell provides care and accommodation for up to 13 people who have mental health needs. On the day of our inspection there were nine people using the service.

The home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Oakwell was last inspected by CQC on 6 November 2013 and was compliant with the regulations in force at that time.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and investigated. However, some CQC notifiable incidents had not been reported to CQC. Staff had been trained in how to manage behaviour that challenged and in safeguarding vulnerable adults. People were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service and appropriate health and safety checks had been carried out.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service and the provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place. Staff were suitably trained and training sessions were planned for any due or overdue refresher training. Staff received regular supervisions and appraisals.

The provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.

Staff were aware of how to protect people from the risk of poor nutrition and people had access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support. Care records contained evidence of visits to and from external health care specialists.

People who used the service, and family members, were complimentary about the standard of care at Oakwell. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible. People had been involved in planning their care and care records were written in a person centred way.

Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs.

People who used the service, and family members, were aware of how to make a complaint however there had been no formal complaints recorded at the service.

The service had a positive culture that was person-centred, open and inclusive. Staff felt supported by the registered manager. The provider had a robust quality assurance system in place and gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources.

People had their needs assessed and the assessment was used to develop personalised nursing support plans. One person said, 'You get to stand on your own two feet', and, 'Staff teach you to cope with things.'

There were systems in place to ensure people received their medication appropriately and in a timely manner. Most people administered their own medication in line with their 'self-medication nursing support plan.'

People and staff told us there were enough staff to meet people's needs. One person commented, 'Staff are excellent, very fair and very caring.' Another person commented, 'I talk to the staff who give me advice which is very, very good.' Another person said, 'I can just knock on the office door anytime.'

People knew how to complain and told us they felt their concerns would be listened to. One person commented, "The service is great, I have nothing to complain about.' Another person said, "The care is incredible, everything is perfect.'

We found that people were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

We did not speak to people who used the service during this visit.