Oxley Woodhouse

Updated 7 August 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 13 June 2018 and was unannounced. An unannounced inspection is where we visit the service without prior warning. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors.

Prior to our inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service. We contacted the local authority commissioning and monitoring team, Healthwatch Kirklees, the infection control team and reviewed all the safeguarding information regarding the service. The registered provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This form provides key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spent time observing the support people received. On the day of inspection we spoke with two people who used the service and one relative. Following our inspection we spoke with two relatives on the telephone and one health professional. We spoke with the registered manager, two deputy managers and two support workers. During our inspection we spent time looking at three people’s care and support records. We also looked at three records relating to recruitment, staff training and supervision records, incident records, maintenance records and a selection of audits.

Updated 7 August 2018

The inspection of Oxley Woodhouse took place on 13 June 2018 and was unannounced. The service was last inspected on 27 January 2016 and at that time the registered provider was meeting requirements.

Oxley Woodhouse is registered to provide personal care for up to 17 people with learning disabilities and other complex health needs. Accommodation at the main building of the home consists of one three-bedroom apartment and two five-bedroom apartments located over two floors which can be accessed by stairs. There is a communal kitchen/dining room, lounge and access to the secure garden. There is also a purpose-built building which houses four one-bedroom apartments with access to the secure garden. On the day of inspection there were 17 people living at the home.

At the time of registration the care service had not been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. However, the service is now working towards developing the provision in line with these principles. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

At our last inspection the service was rated good overall. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Relatives of people who used the service told us their relatives were safe living at Oxley Woodhouse. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew what to do to keep people safe. Individual risks had been assessed and identified as part of the support and care planning process.

Staff were recruited safely and thorough checks were completed before staff started working at the home. We saw there were sufficient numbers of staff to ensure people’s care needs were met. Staff had received training, supervision and appraisal to ensure people received effective care and this also enabled the development of good practice.

Medicines were stored and managed safely. Regular medicine audits were undertaken.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff had undertaken training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were able to explain how this legislation related to the people they supported, which meant people’s rights were being protected. The registered providers new MCA paperwork did not evidence best practice decisions.

We have made a recommendation about the recording of best interest decisions.

People enjoyed a range of activities and were encouraged to maintain life skills and have maximum control over their lives. Staff supported people to retain their independence.

The home had good management and leadership and the registered manager was visible, working with the team, monitoring and supporting staff to ensure people received the care and support they needed. Feedback regarding the registered manager and management team was positive.

Regular quality assurance audits took place within the home to help monitor and improve.

The service had a complaints policy and process in place. Relatives told us they knew what to do if they had any concerns or complaints about the service.

The service worked in partnership with other organisations and local commissioners.