Background to this inspection
Updated
26 February 2019
The Inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, 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 was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type:
Oakley House caters for up to two people with acquired brain injury. The care service had 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
The service had a registered manager. This means that 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:
This inspection took place on the 12 February 2019 and was unannounced.
What we did:
Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed previous reports and notifications that are held on the CQC database. Notifications are important events that the service must let the CQC know about by law. We also reviewed safeguarding alerts and information received from a local authority.
During our inspection we spoke with two people and observed their relationship with staff. We contacted one relative via telephone. We spoke with the manager, and one care worker. We reviewed care files and records held in relation to the running of the service.
Updated
26 February 2019
We inspected Oakley House on the 12 February 2019.
About the service: - Oakley House caters for up to two people with acquired brain injury. There were two people living at the service at the time of our inspection. The service was set in a residential house. Each person had their own private room and access to all the amenities in the house. The service was set in a residential area with easy access to the local community and had a large garden.
People’s experience of using this service: One person told us, “I am happy living here.” A relative told us, “I have every faith in the service and I am entirely happy with the care.”
The service was safe.
¿ Care and treatment was planned and supplied to ensure people's safety and welfare.
¿ There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection and to learn lessons from accidents and incidents.
¿ People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff.
¿ Medication was given to people by staff who had received training to do this safely.
The service was effective.
¿ People were cared for and supported by staff who had received appropriate training.
¿ The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
¿ 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.
¿ People were supported to eat and drink enough to ensure they maintained a balanced diet. Referrals to other health professionals were made when required.
¿ The environment was well maintained and suitable for people's needs.
The service was caring.
¿ Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care.
¿ Staff worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed choices.
The service was responsive.
¿ People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis.
¿ People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities.
¿ The registered manager responded to complaints received in a timely manner.
The service was well-led.
¿ The registered manager had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published 9 April 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor all intelligence received about the service to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.