This inspection took place on 20 November 2015 and was unannounced.
The service was previously inspected in January 2014, we found the service was meeting each of the standards assessed.
Oakwood is part of the Leonard Cheshire Disability group and provides specialist rehabilitation services for people with an acquired brain injury. The service is purpose built and is based in Offerton in Stockport. The service provides 13 places to support and rehabilitate people to lead independent lifestyles. Included are five self-contained rooms which are equipped to help people live more independent lives. All bedrooms are located on the ground floor with en-suite facilities. There is a shared kitchen and dining room, therapy rooms, a lounge, conservatory and space for people to meet visitors or friends in private. There is also adequate car parking facilities close by.
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.
People who used the service told us that they felt safe as a result of the care and support they received.
We found that medication handled safely and that staff received competency checks to ensure medicines were given correctly. However we found that there were no PRN (when required) protocols in place to provide guidance to staff when PRN medication might need to be given. The manager said they would introduce these following our inspection.
We looked at how the service managed risk. We found individual risk assessments had been completed for each person and recorded in their support plan. There were detailed management strategies to provide staff with guidance on how to safely manage the risks to help keep people safe.
People were protected against the risks of abuse because the service had a robust recruitment procedure in place. Appropriate checks were carried out before staff began work at the service to ensure they were fit to work with vulnerable adults. This included ensuring DBS (Disclosure Barring Service) checks were undertaken and that references from previous employer were sought before people commenced in employment.
We found that there were sufficient staff to support people who used the service. We found that staffing levels were adjusted in line with people’s changing needs. Several of the people who used the service required 1:1 support and we saw that sufficient numbers of staff were present during the inspection in order to support people and meet their needs.
We saw that staff had access and had completed a variety of training courses to help them in their roles, with staff telling us that they felt supported to undertake their roles effectively. This meant staff had the necessary skills to support people effectively.
People living at the service were supported with all aspects of daily living, in order for them to develop the living skills to become as independent as possible whilst using the service. This included support with food preparation, laundry and cleaning their bedroom.
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We found that DoLS applications had been made where necessary and that staff had received training and had a good understanding in this area.
People told us they had enough to eat and drink. We saw that there was a shared kitchen area where people could prepare their own meals if they wanted to. If they were unable to do this, then support was provided by staff. Five of the self- contained flats contained a kitchen area , where people could prepare meals at their leisure.
People told us that staff were caring and that they were happy with the service provided to them. Several people were unable to verbally communicate and we saw that there were systems in place so that staff could communicate effectively with them. This included pictorial aids and letter boards, where people could indicate what they wanted to communicate to staff.
We saw that people had access to a range of activities both in and outside the service. This included airplane spotting at the nearby airport, comedy shows, pet therapy and trips to Blackpool. Several people were also keen football supporters and had been on a recent stadium tour at Manchester City.
There was a complaints procedure in place which was displayed at the service where people could see it. We looked at the complaints log and saw complaints had been responded to appropriately, with a response given to the individual complainant.
Both staff and people who used the service spoke favourably about the management and leadership of the service.
There were appropriate governance systems in place to ensure the quality of service was monitored effectively. This included checks of the environment, medication and support plans. The manager also called into the service at evening and weekends to ensure that high quality standards were still being adhered to.