CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oak View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, risk assessments, medicines procedures and infection control were found to be safe, although daytime cleaning records were not complete.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training, people received suitable food and drink, and staff worked with health professionals.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and treated them with warmth, dignity and respect. People were supported to express choices in ways suited to their communication.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people had one-to-one support during the day. Staff supported communication, activities, community trips and relationships, and there was an easy-read complaints procedure.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Managers and staff were supportive and open, but quality checks had not found weaknesses in record keeping. Daily records, cleaning schedules and shift plans needed improvement.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, but management records needed improvement.
This was the home’s first inspection since it was newly registered in 2020. It was unannounced and took place on 12 and 18 January 2022. One inspector observed people and staff, spoke with staff and managers, checked records, and gathered feedback from relatives and a health professional.
Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported in ways suited to their communication and physical needs. Staff knew people well, supported regular activities and helped people make choices about food, clothing, bedrooms and daily life.
The main weakness was record keeping and checks by managers. Daily records did not always explain the care, choices or activities provided. Cleaning schedules and shift plans had also not been completed for several months. The manager sent CQC an improvement plan after the inspection.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement, meaning the service’s management and checking systems were not always consistent.
Staff understood people well
Staff recognised subtle signs of pain, discomfort, happiness or refusal. They adjusted support and gave people space or help when needed.
“Staff knew people's ways, for example one person liked to wait until others had their meal before starting their own meal.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw a warm approach and found that staff protected privacy, dignity and independence during personal care and daily activities.
“We observed that staff were very caring in their approach and people were very content in their surroundings.” from the report
People had meaningful choices
People were supported to choose food, clothes, activities and bedroom decoration. They were also supported to go out and use local facilities.
“People were encouraged to make choices in all aspects of their lives, from what they wore to what they ate and how they spent their day.” from the report
Good support for activities
The home supported activities at home, in the garden and in the local community. Staff adapted plans during the pandemic to reduce risks.
“The registered manager said that the pandemic did not stop activities but rather they were more creative in when and what they did.” from the report
Staffing and medicines were safe
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment checks. Medicines were ordered, stored and given safely, with staff competency checks.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs safely.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingDaily records focused on tasks and did not always record the support given, choices made, how people were or the activities they took part in. Managers’ checks had not identified this.
“There was a lack of detail in daily records.” from the report
Cleaning and shift records
needs fixingDaytime cleaning schedules and shift plans had not been completed for several months, although the home looked clean during both visits. The manager said the cleaning plans had been reinstated after the inspection.
“Daily cleaning schedules and shift plans had not been completed for several months.” from the report
Limited information about food choices
minorInspectors saw and were told that people made food choices, but the records did not show this clearly enough. The home was looking at ways to improve the evidence.
“We were confident people had regular opportunities to make choices in relation to the food they ate, however, records provided limited information in relation to this.” from the report
- 01How are daily records now showing the care given, people’s choices, how they have been and the activities they have taken part in?
- 02How are daytime cleaning schedules and shift plans being completed and checked?
- 03What progress has been made with the DoLS applications that were awaiting processing at the inspection?
- 04How are people’s food choices being recorded now?
- 05What is the current plan for restarting activities such as college or swimming?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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.
Every inspection of Oak View
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 September 2020.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.