Updated 14 January 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection team consisted of one inspector, an assistant inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Their area of expertise was with older people.
Service and service type
Good Oaks Home Care is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit. We needed to be sure that people were informed that we would be contacting them by telephone, and we needed a manager to be available to facilitate this inspection. The registered manager advised us that they would not be available on the first day of the inspection and made suitable arrangements to support the inspection in their absence.
Inspection activity started on 5 November 2019 and ended on 14 November 2019. We visited the office location on 5 November 2019 and 12 November 2019.
What we did before the inspection
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We reviewed other information we held about the service; this included incidents they had notified us about. We also contacted the local authority safeguarding and commissioning teams to obtain their views about the service. We used all of this information to help us plan the inspection.
During the inspection
During the inspection we spoke with eight people and three relatives or friends. We also spoke with the directors of the company, the registered manager and seven staff.
We reviewed a range of records including six care plans and medicines records, three staff files, staff rotas and training records and other information about the management of the service. This included quality assurance records and audits, medicines records and maintenance of equipment.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. This included seeking staff opinions via email and contacting health professionals and commissioners to ask for their view of the service. We received feedback from 12 staff and four health professionals.