We carried out a review of the data available to us about Oaklands House Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Oaklands House Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Oaklands House Residential Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. This service does not provide nursing care. Oaklands House Residential Home accommodates up to 29 older people in one adapted building. During our comprehensive unannounced inspection, there were 27 people using the service, some living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service:
At our last inspection of 1 November 2016, the service was rated requires good overall. The key questions for safe, effective, caring and well-led were rated good and the key question for responsive was requires improvement. At this inspection of 6 March 2019, we found the evidence continued to support the overall rating of good and improvements had been made in responsive.
People told us that they were very happy using the service and their individual needs were being met.
Staff were motivated to ensure people lived as full lives as possible. Staff were responsive to people’s individual needs. Activities were provided, which were designed in consultation with the people who used the service.
There were systems designed to keep people safe, including from abuse. Risks to people in their daily lives were assessed and plans in place to reduce these. People’s medicines were managed safely.
There were enough trained and skilled staff to meet people’s needs. Recruitment processes were safe.
There was an ongoing programme of improvement in the environment. Infection control procedures safeguarded people from the risks of cross infection.
People had access to health professionals when needed. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.
People shared positive relationships with staff. People’s privacy, independence and dignity was respected. People were listened to in relation to their choices about how they wanted to be cared for.
There was a complaints procedure in place and people’s complaints were addressed. People were asked for their views about the service and these were valued and listened to.
The service had robust systems to monitor and assess the service provided.
Rating at last inspection: At our last inspection of 1 November 2016, which was published 6 December 2016, the service was rated good.
Why we inspected: This inspection took place as part of our planned programme of inspections, based on the rating of good made at our last inspection.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Follow up: We will continue to monitor this service according to our inspection schedule.
Our inspection of 27 July 2015 found that there were not sufficient staff. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s assessed needs.
On the day of our inspection the manager had not registered with the Care Quality Commission but we are aware that they have applied to register and are going through the registration process. 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.
Medicines were stored, recorded and disposed of safely and correctly. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines and kept relevant records. However, we noted on the day of our inspection that one person was not getting their medicine as prescribed. This was immediately addressed by the manager.
People's individual assessments and care plans were person-centred, reviewed monthly or when their needs changed. However, one care plan we looked at contained errors and contradictions. The service was developing records of people’s life history but this was not detailed. Clear information about the service, the facilities, and how to complain was provided to people and visitors.
Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to raise an alert if they had any concerns. Risk assessments were centred on the needs of the individual. Each risk assessment included clear measures to reduce identified risks and guidance for staff to follow to make sure people were protected from harm. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how the risks of recurrence could be reduced.
There was a robust system of monitoring checks and audits to identify any improvements that needed to be made. The results of these audits were monitored by the provider. The management team acted on the results of these checks to improve the quality of the service and care.
There was a development plan in place which addressed areas for improvement identified by the manager and area manager. This identified timescales and the person responsible for driving the improvement.
Oaklands House Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 29 older people, some living with dementia.
There were 25 people living in the service when we inspected on 27 July 2015. This was an unannounced inspection.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Systems for ensuring there were enough staff were not robust enough. This led us to be concerned about the service’s quality assurance processes because this issue had been identified as a shortfall at a previous inspection. People waited for long periods to have their call bells answered and staff were unable to tell us how people’s differing needs and dependency effected the staff numbers and deployment throughout the day. We saw some poor practice in regard to staff behaviour for example talking to colleagues instead of answering a call.
There were procedures in place which safeguarded the people who used the service from the potential risk of abuse. Staff understood the various types of abuse and knew who to report any concerns to.
There were procedures and processes in place to ensure the safety of the people who used the service. These included checks on the environment and risk assessments which identified how the risks to people were minimised.
There were appropriate arrangements in place to ensure people’s medicines were obtained, stored and administered safely.
Staff were trained and supported to meet the needs of the people who used the service. However, improvements were needed to provide more social interactions to people. Especially those people who remained in their bedrooms and were at risk of social isolation.
People, or their representatives, were involved in making decisions about their care and support. People’s care plans had been tailored to the individual and contained information about how they communicated and their ability to make decisions. However, improvements were needed in the ways that staff were provided with guidance in care records about people’s specific care needs.
Staff had good relationships with people who used the service. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and interacted with people in a caring, respectful and professional manner.
People were supported to see, when needed, health and social care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment.
People’s nutritional needs were being assessed and met. Where concerns were identified about a person’s food intake, or ability to swallow, appropriate referrals had been made for specialist advice and support.
A complaints procedure was in place. People’s concerns and complaints were listened to, addressed in a timely manner and used to improve the service.
During this inspection we identified two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
People told us that the service was well led. One person said, that the registered manager, 'Has a lot to do, comes around when you have not been feeling well and checks how you are.'
Everyone we spoke with praised the standard of food. One person remarked, 'The food is lovely here, it is a delight to eat (chef's) foods'never had a bad meal yet.' Another person told us, 'You get choice, chef makes a lovely omelette.'
We found the majority of the staff treated people in a caring and respectful way and were attentive to people's needs. One person told us, 'When I call in the middle of the night they (staff) bring me a cup of tea.' Where we identified a shortfall, action was being taken at the time of our inspection to deal with the situation.
We found that the majority of time that there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Where we identified additional staff were required to support the tea time routines, the provider told us they were in the process of recruiting another member of staff.
We saw that the staff interacted with people in a caring, respectful and professional manner. Staff were attentive to people's needs and they responded to requests for assistance promptly. One person told us, 'If you need anything you only have to press the buzzer. They (staff) come straight away.'
People spoken with told us that they were consulted about the care and support they were provided with.
People told us that they felt that their needs were met. One person said, 'You will get no complaints from me.' Another person said, 'They are doing all that they should.' Another said, 'We are well looked after here.'
We looked at the care records of four people who used the service. These records identified that people experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.
Two people told us that there were enough staff working in the home and that the staff answered call bells promptly.
Five people who were spoken with said that they felt that their needs were met and that they were consulted about the care and support that they were provided with. Two people told us that they were independent with their personal care needs and that the staff always respected their independence.
People told us that the quality of the food was good and that they were provided with choices of food and drink and always got enough to eat and drink. We asked a person if they had enjoyed their lunch and they said 'it was better than I could have done' and 'I must have, I ate it all up'. Two people told us that their specific dietary needs were met.
One person told us that there were plenty of activities offered that they could participate in if they chose to. They showed us several pieces of art work that people had done which were displayed in the conservatory.