CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Oak Manor Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, secure medicines storage, suitable staffing and improved premises. However, some repairs had not been identified by the home's own checks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's needs and preferences. Staff had training and competency checks, and people were supported with nutrition, healthcare and lawful decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were observed being treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Families said staff knew their relatives well and provided safe, supportive care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Activities and support were adapted to people's preferences, and families felt able to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management had made significant improvements, including better audits and incident reporting. However, the quality system had not independently found all repair and maintenance issues, and the report noted a long history of inconsistent standards.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Rated Good and no longer in special measures; inspectors found kind, safe care, but leadership and quality checks still need improvement.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection. Inspectors visited on 24 March 2022, spoke with staff and families, observed care, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff records and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Inspectors found detailed care plans, secure medicines storage, suitable staffing, respectful care and good involvement of people and families.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had not always identified repairs or maintained standards through its own checks. However, repairs were started immediately during the inspection and the provider was no longer breaching regulations.
The home had previously been rated Inadequate and placed in special measures in December 2020. Inspectors found enough improvement for it to leave special measures, but noted a long history of inconsistent compliance.
Improved safety
The home had addressed earlier problems with the garden, fire exits and storage of dangerous items. It was no longer in breach of the premises and equipment regulation.
“At this inspection we found the provider had made the required improvements and was no longer in breach of this regulation.” from the report
Medicines managed well
Medicines were locked away, stocks were monitored and staff had regular training and competency checks.
“There were effective systems in place to ensure stocks of medicines were available and stock control was well monitored.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff supporting people in a meaningful and kind way. People were given choices and supported to remain as independent as possible.
“Staff were observed supporting people in a dignified manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, and people and relatives were involved in writing and reviewing them.
“People and their relatives were involved in the writing of their care plan and at subsequent reviews to ensure their voice had been captured.” from the report
Improved reporting and audits
The home had improved its reporting of incidents and was auditing medicines, care plans and daily records.
“We found all incidents had been reported as required and the manager was clear on which incidents constitute reporting to external bodies, such as CQC and the local authority safeguarding team.” from the report
Quality checks missed repairs
needs fixingInspectors found damaged areas that the home's own quality checks had not identified. These could affect infection control and people's experience of their surroundings.
“The provider had still failed to identify all areas for improvement through their quality assurance system.” from the report
Long history of inconsistent standards
needs fixingThe report says the home had not consistently met regulations since 2019, with a compliance history going back to 2013. Although it had improved and was no longer in breach, inspectors said more work was needed to show that standards could be maintained long term.
“Further work is required to ensure that the provider can consistently, independently identify and act upon areas for improvement and demonstrate its ability to operate a service that maintains expected quality standards in the long term.” from the report
Some refurbishment remained unfinished
minorSome areas were still being refurbished, including temporary bedrooms and other parts of the building. Inspectors identified damage to walls and an en-suite bathroom, and repairs began during the visit.
“Some areas of the building had not been fully refurbished at the time of the inspection.” from the report
- 01What repairs and refurbishment work remained after the inspection, and have they now all been completed?
- 02How do managers make sure their quality checks identify damage, infection control risks and other problems before inspectors find them?
- 03What specific changes have been made since the home was rated Inadequate and placed in special measures?
- 04How will you show that the improved standards can be maintained over the long term?
- 05How are care staff supported to read and use people's detailed care plans when staff said they did not have time to read them?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection of the care home, with activity from 24 March to 6 April 2022; inspectors reviewed all five key questions and also checked infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 May 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Oak Manor Nursing Home was previously rated Inadequate; this targeted inspection found infection control improvements, but the home was not re-rated.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 12 November 2020. One inspector looked only at infection prevention and control after concerns at an earlier inspection.
The home had improved its cleaning, use of protective equipment and arrangements for visitors and new admissions. Inspectors said these improvements were not yet fully established in the manager's and provider's oversight.
The overall rating remained Inadequate from the previous inspection. This visit was marked 'Inspected but not rated', so it does not show that the home had improved its overall rating.
Visitor infection controls
Visitors had clear information at the entrances, with hand sanitiser and protective equipment available.
“Information was clearly displayed at the entrances for visitors to follow, alongside sanitizer and personal protective equipment (PPE) for visitors to use.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff were observed using the correct protective equipment and understood how to dispose of it safely.
“We observed the correct PPE being used, staff were aware of what should be used and how to dispose of safely.” from the report
Cleaning and infection monitoring
The home had added cleaning procedures and staff, and introduced a monthly infection control audit.
“Additional cleaning procedures had been implemented since our last inspection and additional staff allocated to complete these.” from the report
Admission arrangements
Recent admissions had been planned with isolation and barrier nursing arrangements, which inspectors confirmed through observation.
“The manager confirmed that two recent admissions to the service had been properly planned with arrangements made for isolation and barrier nursing.” from the report
Improvements not yet embedded
needs fixingThe provider and manager had improved their oversight, but inspectors said this was not yet firmly established. The previous overall Inadequate rating remained.
“Improvements were being implemented to oversight of this by the manager and the provider however these were not yet embedded.” from the report
Overall service remained Inadequate
seriousThis visit checked only a specific infection control concern. It did not review the whole service, so the previous Inadequate overall rating remained in place.
“The overall rating for the service has not changed following this targeted inspection and remains inadequate.” from the report
- 01What improvements have been made since the previous Inadequate inspection, beyond infection prevention and control?
- 02How do you now check that infection control practices are followed consistently by all staff?
- 03What did the monthly infection control audits find, and what action was taken in response?
- 04What arrangements are currently used for isolating and caring for new admissions?
- 05When was the most recent comprehensive inspection, and what was its outcome?
This was a targeted inspection of a specific infection prevention and control concern; it did not assess the whole Safe question or the other key questions, so the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 January 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Oak Manor Nursing Home
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021
Location report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2020Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Inadequatedown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 July 2013.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.