Archived: Oakfield House

Updated 12 March 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 checked 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 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 service.

Service and service type:

Oakfield House is a care home. People in a care home receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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 the inspection:

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse; and we sought feedback from health professionals. We assessed the information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make.

People living at Oakfield House could tell us about their experiences living at the service, we spoke with 14 people and three relatives and visitors. We spent time observing staff with people in the communal areas during the inspection. We spoke with the registered manager, head of care, three care staff and the incoming manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records, reviewed medicine records. We looked at recruitment records and training records. We reviewed records relating to the management of the home and a variety of policies and procedures developed and implemented by the provider.

Updated 12 March 2019

About the service:

Oakfield House is a residential care home that accommodates up to 30 older people who maybe living with dementia. At the time of the inspection 24 people living at the service.

What life was like for people using the service:

People told us that they felt safe and that staff met their needs and preferences. People and relatives told us the registered manager was approachable and dealt with any concerns they had promptly. However, the registered manager had not acted to meet the breaches of regulation found at the last inspection. Checks and audits had not been completed to ensure the quality of the service and to make improvements. There continued to be shortfalls in the assessment of potential risks to people’s health and welfare. People and staff told us they had been kept informed by the registered manager of any changes but resident meetings had not been held so that they could give their opinion and make suggestions. The registered manager had not continued to work with other agencies to improve the service or attend forums to keep up to date.

Staff knew people’s needs and preferences, people told us staff supported them in the way they preferred. However, care plans did not always reflect the care given and people’s needs had not been assessed in accordance with national guidance. People could take part in activities they enjoyed, and were encouraged to be as independent as possible and make their own decisions.

Staff monitored people’s health and referred them to health professionals when required. Staff worked with health professionals to support people at the end of their lives. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, who had been recruited safely and received appropriate training for their role.

The service was clean and odour free and had been adapted to meet people’s needs. People told us they received their medicines when they needed them. Staff knew how to report concerns and keep people safe.

More information is in the detailed findings below.

Rating at the last inspection:

Requires Improvement (report published 7 February 2018).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. We found that the service continued to meet the characteristics of Requires Improvement, with the domains of well led now rated Inadequate. The overall rating is now Requires Improvement.

Follow up:

We will work with the provider following this report being published to understand and monitor how they will make changes to ensure the service improves their rating to at least Good.