The Care Quality Commission

Archived: Oaklands Rest Home

Weston Lane, Oswestry, Shropshire, SY11 2BQ (01691) 652543

Provided and run by:
Sure Care (UK) Limited

All Inspections

24 April 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

There were 11 people living in the home on the day of the inspection. We spoke to four people, four staff, the acting manager and the provider. We looked at selected care records, staff files and other records relating to the running of a care home. We also undertook a short observational framework (SOFI) which is a tool used by the Commission to assess the quality of care when people may not be able to give their views on the place where they lived or the care they received.

The purpose of the visit was to see if the home had addressed the compliance actions issued in January 2012

Some people who lived in the home were unable to tell us their views due to their dementia. We spoke to four people who all told us that they were satisfied with the care they received at the home. People told us that they liked the food provided and we saw people enjoying their mid day meal.

We saw that staff were kind and courteous towards people and worked hard to meet people's needs.

Care plans had improved and gave clearer information and guidance for staff in how to meet people's needs than those seen at the last visit. However, some records were not always up to date and did not always contain enough information to make sure that people at the home received the care they needed or were free from harm or injury. Records did not always include clear guidance to staff on how to meet individuals' care and health needs.This had meant some people's needs had not been met.

The home was clean and tidy and measures were now in place to reduce the risk of cross infection.

Medication systems had improved and prescribed items were now stored securely.

The home's environment had improved because several bedrooms had been decorated and some new linen had been provided. Current research into how to provide a suitable environment for people with dementia had not been used as the provider was unaware of this and we did not see any evidence that people were involved in the changes that affected them. The lack of lifting equipment on the first and second floors restricts who can be safely accommodated on those floors but information about the home aimed at prospective residents and funding authorities does not make this clear.

The appropriate checks were not in place for someone who had recently started work at the home so people may have been put at risk becasue the provider and acting manager did not follow the home's own recruitment policy.

The home did not have a training programme for staff to make that they have the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs.

Audit systems were not in place to internally assess the quality of the environment, infection control, care records or the accident book so that the provider could be assured that the service provided met people's needs in an appropriate manner.

14 December 2011

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited the home to look at two outcomes, care and welfare and assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. However, we observed the poor quality of the bedding, towels and some furniture and this led to us looking at additional outcomes.

There were ten people living in the home on the day of the visit.

Some people were not able to tell us their views about the home. We spoke to two people who told us that staff were kind to them and they had no complaints. People told us that they liked the food provided.

Care plans did not fully record people's needs or give clear guidance to staff on how people should be cared for. Risk assessments were not updated and reviewed and some were not completed accurately so the risks were not identified and measures to reduce them put in place.

Some furniture and fittings are significantly worn through wear and tear and lack of ongoing investment and maintenance. In some cases this has resulted in a risk of infection and cross infection.

Linen provided was of poor quality and did not afford people respect and dignity.

We found that systems were not in place to assess staff competency to manage medicines safely. The home did not carry out effective audits to identify problems with the way that medicines were administered or stored.

We saw that some audit systems have been set up but these had not been completed since 2010 and were not kept in a way that meant the findings could be used to improve the quality of the service or environment

We found that records were not always up-to-date and did not always contain enough information to make sure that people living at the home received the care they needed and were free from harm or injury. Records did not include clear guidance to staff on how to meet individual's care and health needs.