We carried out a review of the data available to us about Oaklands Littlehampton Limited 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 Littlehampton Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
• Visiting the home was by appointment only. Visiting was available in the garden and a lounge that could be sanitised between visits. Visitors accessed the home via a separate entrance and were provided with clear information ahead of visits.
• The registered manager had prepared for potential outbreaks by providing additional equipment to minimise cross contamination risk. The manager had also prepared a folder of essential guidance for staff.
• A member of staff was allocated as an infection prevention and control (IPC) lead. This supported safe systems and ensured staff had a point of contact for queries.
•The registered manager had purchased equipment that helped the sanitisation of the home and had detailed cleaning routines in place.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection, we found the service remained Good.
People received safe care and treatment at Oaklands Littlehampton Limited, from trained staff who knew how to recognise the signs of potential abuse and what action to take. Risks to people were identified, assessed and managed to mitigate risks. Care plans provided detailed information and guidance for staff in relation to managing people’s risks. Staffing levels were sufficient to keep people safe and meet their needs. Robust recruitment systems were in place for new staff. Medicines were managed safely.
Staff had been trained in a range of areas considered mandatory to undertake their roles and responsibilities. They had supervision meetings with their line managers and attended staff meetings. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. The food on offer was nutritious and people had a choice from a varied menu. Special diets were catered for. People had access to a range of healthcare professionals and services.
Staff were kind and caring of people and positive relationships had been developed. People spoke highly of the staff who looked after them. People were encouraged to be involved in making decisions about their care and their likes and dislikes were known by staff. People were treated with dignity and respect and had the privacy they needed.
Care plans were personalised and provided detailed information and guidance for staff on how to meet people’s needs. People and their relatives were involved in reviewing their care plans. Some people were involved in a digital health project that monitored their particular medical condition. A range of activities was on offer if people chose to participate in these. Outings into the community were organised. Complaints were listened to and dealt with satisfactorily.
People were involved in developing the service and their views were listened to through surveys and attendance at residents’ meetings. Relatives were also asked for their feedback. The home was well managed and people and staff spoke highly of the registered manager. Staff were asked for their feedback through a survey and felt supported by management. The Chief Executive of the provider visited the home daily. An effective system of audits was in place to monitor and measure the quality of care delivered and service overall.
Further information is in the findings below.
This unannounced inspection took place on the 24 February 2015. Oakland Grange provides support and accommodation for up to 42 older people, some of whom were living with dementia. On the day we inspected 28 people were being accommodated.
The home has a registered manager. 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.
When we inspected the home on 26 November 2013 we found a breach of the regulations regarding the care and welfare of people and deemed this had a minor impact on people. The provider sent us an action plan and told us how they would address these concerns.
At this inspection, we noted that staff had an understanding of abuse and what action they should take if they felt someone was not receiving safe care. Staff knew there were safeguarding policies and procedures. Risk assessments relating to people were completed to promote people’s independence. Staffing levels met the needs of people. Staff received training to ensure they could meet people’s needs. Staffing recruitment records were complete and detailed all the necessary checks had been undertaken to ensure people were safe. The administration of medicines practices in the home were safe.
People felt staff had the knowledge to care for them effectively. Training was provided to ensure staff had the skills to meet people’s needs. Staff received support but all did not receive regular formal supervision. Staff had awareness and understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People had their nutritional needs taken into account and there was a choice at all meal times. Health needs were assessed and the relevant professionals were involved in people’s care provision.
Staff were kind, respectful and caring. People were involved in decisions about their care. Care plans were personalised and provided detailed information to guide staff about the support a person needed. People had no concerns or complaints about the home and felt able to speak to the manager if they did.
The registered manager operated an open door policy and welcomed feedback on any aspect of the service. Staff confirmed management were open and approachable.
Quality assurance in the form of auditing took place on a regular basis. Any learning from audits took place and this was reviewed to ensure it brought about effective change.
We also gathered evidence of people's experience of the services by looking at a selection of records. This included care records and medication records. We found care records needed some improvements to ensure they provided care staff with appropriate information to follow with regard to the care to be delivered. This would mean individual needs would be met
We also found they demonstrated that people had given consent to the care they received.
Medication records we examined demonstrated people had received medication that had been prescribed to them.
We spoke with two members of staff, who were on duty. We found that they had a good understanding of people's individual needs, preferences and wishes.
We observed that staff spoke to people living there in a polite and friendly manner. People told us that the staff were nice and very helpful.
We looked at the training records of staff which demonstrated that staff had appropriate and regular training.
The home encouraged comments and suggestions from people and their relatives. We saw evidence that concerns raised were acted on.
We spoke with three people who have been accommodated at Oakland Grange. They told us about the care and support they had received and confirmed they were very satisfied. They confirmed that they had been involved with the planning and delivery of their care; their wishes and preferences had been taken into account. They also told us that, in their view, there were sufficient staff on duty to provide for their needs.
One person told us, "The care home does what it does very well indeed. They make every effort to accommodate people here."
Another person said, "The staff are absolutely wonderful!'
We spoke with three members of staff who were on duty. They were very knowledgeable about the needs of people and what was required of them to ensure they had been met. They also said they were confident the manager would listen to them if they had any concerns.
The atmosphere throughout the visit was good. It was calm, friendly and homely. We observed staff on duty had a good relationship with the people living there. When talking to people, staff were friendly and professional. They spoke clearly to ensure they were understood and listened carefully to make sure they knew what was expected of them.
We spoke with three members of care staff who were on duty. They demonstrated they knew about the level of care that each person required. They also told us they were well supported by the manager and well trained so that they were able to provide good quality care.
We also spoke with two relatives who were also visiting the care home. They told us they believed the staff were competent. They said, 'I was impressed how quickly the staff made themselves aware of my father's needs. They are also very friendly.'