Oakwood House

Oakwood House is a residential care home providing care and accommodation to 10 people with mental health needs. At the time of the inspection, there were 9 people using the service.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

People and their relatives were positive about the service and the way staff treated the people they supported. Staff treated people in a caring way and showed dignity and respect when they provided support. They promoted people’s independence and maintained their privacy and gave them choices in how they wanted their care provided.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The management team worked closely with other health professionals to help ensure people had access to the services they required to maintain their health.

People had their care needs assessed before they began to use the service. They received personalised care and support that met their individual needs and took full account of their background history and personal circumstances. There were systems to ensure people received their medicines at the correct time. Risks associated with people's care were identified, and there was guidance for staff about how to keep people safe.

There were systems to safeguard people from abuse and these were being appropriately used. People were provided with information on how to make a complaint. Complaints made were investigated and responded to. The provider had arrangements to monitor and improve quality of the service provided. People's right to confidentiality was protected.

People and staff felt there was a good atmosphere and an open culture in the service. There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs. Staff received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people appropriately. The provider had a thorough recruitment and selection process in place for new staff. Staff had completed a structured induction.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 1 February 2018).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Oakwood House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service provides personal care and accommodation for eight people with mental health needs. At the time of our visit, eight people were using the service.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 felt safe using the service and were protected from abuse because the staff knew how to identify and report concerns. Risks to people were assessed and reviewed regularly.

People were supported to make decisions and choices in relation to their care and support. Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) .

The provider undertook all necessary checks before new staff began work for the service. Staffing levels were sufficient to ensure people received appropriate support to meet their needs. Staff understood their role and responsibilities and were supported to maintain their skills through supervision, appraisals and training.

People had access to appropriate health professionals when required and staff monitored and responded when their health needs changed. They were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. Systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely, as prescribed by their doctor.

People were happy with the support they received from staff who they described as kind and caring. Staff understood the level of support people needed and were familiar with their care and support needs. They respected people's privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

Care plans were individualised and reflected each person’s needs and preferences. People were involved in planning their care and were supported to access the community.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the way the service was managed. They knew how to make a complaint and their views were listened to and acted upon.

The registered manager was approachable and worked with the staff to ensure people were supported appropriately.

The provider had an on-going quality monitoring process to identify areas of improvement required within the service. Where improvements had been identified there were actions plans in place.

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. There were systems in place to ensure that management and staff learnt from events that adversely affected the people using the service.

Is the service effective?

People received effective care from staff that were trained and supported by the manager. People were involved in assessments of their health and care needs and in writing their plan of care so they understood the information they included. Staff encouraged and supported people to keep healthy and well through regular monitoring of people's general health and making sure they attended scheduled medical and healthcare appointments.

Is the service caring?

There were processes in place to ensure that people who used the service were able to contribute to discussions about how they preferred to be cared for and supported. People were supported by attentive and patient staff. We saw them give encouragement to people and these interactions were caring and compassionate. Staff respected peoples' privacy, dignity and right to be involved in decisions and make choices about their care and treatment. People we spoke with gave us positive feedback on the care and support they received in the home.

Is the service responsive?

There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately. We found staff continually monitored people's condition and where necessary sought advice and assistance from other community based health and social care professionals.

Is the service well-led?

People who used the service appeared at ease in their surroundings and spoke freely about their experiences. People who used this service were able to make choices with regard to their daily lives such as what they would like to wear or to eat or whether they would like to join in any activities. Staff helped them in the way that they preferred and they had their wishes, privacy, dignity and independence respected. The provider carried out regular checks to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided. In this way the provider could ensure that the quality of the service was maintained.

Oakwood House was located in suitable premises. One person said 'I like having my own room and bathroom and the garden is nice.' The provider had taken steps to reduce any risks to people by checking all parts of the building for any maintenance issues. They had organised safety checks by specialists of the gas, electricity and heating systems. There were regular fire drills. The complaints procedure was effective and the provider had asked people to comment on the quality of the service.

People also told us that they felt safe with the staff. They said they would raise any concerns with the staff or their relative or friend. The staff were aware of the signs and symptoms of abuse. However, we were concerned about the absence of up to date national and local guidance about safeguarding people from abuse. This could have a detrimental effect on people using the service as they would be unable to respond in a timely manner to identify and prevent abuse from happening. People who use the service were positive about the staff who supported them. They told us that the staff were "friendly". Although people said they liked the food in the home, one person said "you can't have cereal that you like everyday. You can't have everything you like because there are other residents to think of." We found that on the day of the inspection the food stocks in the home were low. We have made a compliance action so that people are supported to have adequate nutrition and hydration.