Archived: Oakdene Residential 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. Oakdene Residential Care Home accommodates up to 28 adults with a learning disability. The service provides both long term and respite care. On the day of our inspection, eight people were using the service. The service is located close to the centre of Nottingham. The service was in the process of becoming a respite service only. People who lived at the service permanently, were in process of moving into supported living accommodation.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. 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.” Registering the Right Support CQC policy.

At the last inspection in May 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’, in all the key questions and at this inspection; we found the service remained ‘Good’ again in all areas. 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.

People who used the service and relatives, were confident staff supported people to remain safe. The provider had safeguarding policies and provided staff with refresher safeguarding training, to support them to protest people from avoidable harm, discrimination and abuse.

Risks associated with people’s needs including the environment, had been assessed and planned for, these were regularly reviewed for any changes to protect people’s safety. Staff were aware of known risks and the action required to manage risks without placing restrictions on people.

There were sufficient skilled and experienced staff deployed sufficiently, to meet people’s care and support needs and safe staff recruitment procedures were in place and used. People received their prescribed medicines safely and these were managed in line with national best practice guidance.

Accidents and incidents were analysed for lessons learnt to reduce further reoccurrence. Staff sought guidance from external health and social care professionals, to support with people’s ongoing care and support needs.

Staff were aware of the prevention and control measures of cross contamination and infection control risks and the environment and care equipment was clean. Staff were provided with relevant equipment, guidance and training in health and safety and infection control. Emergency contingency plans were in place for staff to follow for likely foreseen emergencies to ensure people’s safety.

Staff used nationally recognised assessment tools to effectively meet people’s care and support needs. Staff received an induction, ongoing training and support to ensure their knowledge remained up to date and their competency of high standard.

People were supported with their nutritional needs, food and drink choices were offered and provided. People did not regularly receive snacks, but immediate action was taken by the registered manager to improve the provision of snacks. The staff worked well with external health care professionals to support people with health needs’

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 supported this practice. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People received care and support from staff who were kind, compassionate and treated them with dignity and respected their privacy. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported, they understood people’s needs, preferences, and what was important to them. Advocacy information was available should people have required this support. People and or their relative or representative, was involved in discussions and decisions about the care and support received.

People’s needs were assessed and support plans provided staff with guidance to enable them to provide a personalised service. Staff had a person centred approach, they supported people with their individual needs and routines in ways that were important to them.

People received opportunities to pursue their interests and hobbies, and social activities were offered. People were also supported to participate in community activities and interests. The provider had made available the complaint procedure and this was provided in an easy read format to support people’s communication needs.

There was an open and transparent culture and good leadership, oversight and accountability. People and relatives or representatives, received opportunities to share their feedback about the service. The provider had quality assurance checks in place on quality and safety. The service was going through a period of change and the registered manager was managing this well and provided people, relatives and staff with support.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Staff had consulted with people who used the service (and their representatives) about what support was to be provided.

People said or showed us that they received all of the personal support and healthcare they needed.

People who used the service, staff and visitors were not fully protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

Some of the quality checks were not sufficiently robust. This resulted in people being at increased risk of not receiving support that was safe, reliable and responsive to their needs.

People received the care and support they required to improve their health and well-being. Care records were written in detail and provided clear guidance to staff members, although these records were initially not in place for some physical care needs. This was resolved before the end of our inspection.

People were provided with a choice of meals and staff members assisted them appropriately with eating and drinking if this was required. One person told us that their meal was, 'Very nice'.

Medicines were stored appropriately and records were maintained to show all storage areas were kept at the correct temperature. Administration records were kept and people received their medicines in a safe way.

Staff members received supervision and training from the provider or from external sources to ensure they had the skills and support to properly carry out their roles and care for people.

The service had a policy and procedure to guide people in how to make a complaint and information about taking complaints further. We observed that staff members took people's concerns seriously, even if they were not able to easily identify the nature of the concern or resolve it.