CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakcroft
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found safe medicines systems, enough staff, reviewed risk assessments and appropriate infection prevention arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff followed consent and best-interest processes, had relevant training and supported people to eat well and access healthcare. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to express their views, make choices and develop their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was tailored to people's needs, preferences and communication methods. People took part in activities at home and in the local community, and complaints were managed appropriately.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive, person-centred culture. Audits, feedback and improvement plans were used to monitor quality and address shortfalls.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with end-of-life plans still to be put in place.
Inspectors visited without notice on 4 and 6 October 2023. They spoke with one person, observed the other three people, spoke with relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, detailed care plans, respectful support and activities that helped people stay active and connected with the community.
People were supported to make choices, build independence and access healthcare. The home had effective checks and improvement systems. However, end-of-life support plans had not yet been created because people were healthy at the time.
Personalised support
Support plans and risk assessments reflected people's individual needs, preferences and goals. They were reviewed and updated.
“Support plans and risk assessments were person-centred, regularly reviewed and updated.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and build their independence in ways that considered safety and their best interests.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed staff treating people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. Staff knew people's likes, dislikes and preferences.
“We observed staff interactions with people which showed they were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity, and respect.” from the report
End-of-life planning
needs fixingThe home did not yet have end-of-life support plans. The manager said these were planned, even though people were healthy at the time.
“The registered manager told us they did not have end of life support plans; however, she was planning to put end of life support plans in place.” from the report
Use of agency staff
minorA relative said agency staff were sometimes needed and that this was not ideal. The report says some agency staff had worked at the home for a while, which was better.
“Sometimes the home needs to use agency staff, which isn't ideal. Some agency staff have worked there for a while now, so that is better.” from the report
- 01When will each person's end-of-life support plan be completed, and how will their wishes be recorded and reviewed?
- 02How often are agency staff used, and how do you make sure people are supported by staff who know them well?
- 03How are medicine competency assessments kept up to date for all staff?
- 04How will people who need restrictions for safety still get access to the kitchen when they can use it safely?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in care reviews and quality feedback?
The inspection assessed all five key questions and included observations, discussions with people, relatives and staff, and reviews of care, medicines, recruitment and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 November 2023 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, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with one safeguarding notification sent late.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 2 October 2017. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care plans, recruitment records, staff rosters and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, received their medicines safely, and had enough staff support.
People were described as happy and settled. Staff involved people in decisions, respected their privacy, followed personalised care plans and supported activities in the home and community.
The home was still rated Good, the same as at the previous comprehensive inspection in September 2015. Inspectors found one safeguarding notification had not been sent to the CQC on time, but it was submitted during the inspection.
Safe medicines
Medicines were given by trained staff and the home had processes for ordering, storing, administering, recording and disposing of them safely.
“People's medicines were managed safely within the service.” from the report
Kind relationships
People appeared relaxed and happy with staff. Staff knew people's interests and treated them with respect.
“People enjoyed kind, sensitive, positive and caring relationships with the staff who provided their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, abilities and communication needs. Staff supported people to make choices and develop independence.
“Care plans were individualised and documented people's preferences about their care, for example, what the person liked to eat and we saw these foods were provided.” from the report
Activities and community life
People took part in daily activities based on their interests, including shopping, days out, holidays, gardening, cooking and art.
“Staff supported people to attend a range of community based activities daily, based on their interests.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used feedback, medicines and health and safety audits, and regular management reviews to identify and address improvements.
“Any issues identified through the audit processes were addressed through an associated action plan, to ensure there was a process of continual service improvement for people.” from the report
Late safeguarding notification
needs fixingThe manager did not initially send the CQC a required notification about a safeguarding alert raised with the local authority. It was sent during the inspection.
“We found they had omitted to send us one safeguarding notification to inform us of a safeguarding alert they had raised with the local authority.” from the report
Staff vacancies
minorThere were one and a half staff vacancies. The home covered the vacant hours with existing staff rather than agency workers, so families should ask how this affects staffing levels and staff workload.
“Although the registered manager told us there were one and a half staff vacancies, the vacant staff hours were covered by existing staff rather than agency staff” from the report
- 01What steps are now in place to make sure every safeguarding notification is sent to the CQC on time?
- 02How are the one and a half staff vacancies being covered now, and how do you check this does not affect people's care?
- 03What is the current position on the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications that were still waiting to be assessed?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing and updating their care plan?
- 05What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative based on their interests?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and the ratings remained Good from the previous comprehensive inspection in September 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 October 2017 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 Oakcroft
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 July 2014.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.