CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakdown House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including the use of PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and outbreak arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in the targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Oakdown House: infection control was found safe, but this targeted inspection was not rated.
Inspectors visited on 14 December 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during a Covid-19 outbreak. It looked only at infection prevention and control.
The inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, following social distancing and shielding guidance, and arranging Covid-19 testing. They also found the home clean and observed regular cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.
Staff worked in dedicated teams for each of the four buildings. People who tested positive were cared for in their bedrooms where possible. The home also provided activities and support to reduce isolation during the pandemic.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found that staff used PPE appropriately and that supplies were available throughout the home.
“We observed staff donning, doffing and wearing PPE appropriately.” from the report
Reducing isolation
The home provided activities and extra support to help people stay well during the pandemic.
“Staff had worked hard to support people's wellbeing during the pandemic by providing in-house activities and also spent time with people to help ensure they did not feel isolated.” from the report
Cleaning arrangements
The home was clean and tidy, with staff recording cleaning and regularly disinfecting frequently touched areas.
“All staff ensured regular disinfection of frequently touched surfaces of the home for example handrails and bannisters.” from the report
Managing outbreak risks
The four buildings had separate staff teams, and people with Covid-19 were cared for in their bedrooms where possible to reduce spread.
“Each unit had its own dedicated staff team to try to contain the outbreak of Covid-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How do you support people who do not understand the need for social distancing?
- 03How do you manage staffing levels during outbreaks or other emergencies?
- 04How do you support residents' wellbeing and prevent isolation when visitors are restricted?
- 05How often are staff tested, and how are cleaning and infection control checks followed up?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 December 2020 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, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with the Effective rating improved from Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection over 9 and 10 March 2020. Inspectors spoke with people, staff, relatives and professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and good support from health professionals.
People were treated with respect and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities. The home had improved its work around mental capacity and best-interest decisions since the previous inspection.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found the home consistently managed and providing good-quality, person-centred care at the time of this inspection. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 12 May 2017.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and develop skills. Most people went out regularly, helped with household tasks or meals, and some managed their own money.
“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 saw warm, respectful interactions. Staff knew people well and supported privacy, dignity, equality and personal relationships.
“We saw positive interactions between staff and people throughout the inspection.” from the report
Communication support
The home used Makaton, picture cards, easy-read information, iPads and body language to help people express their needs.
“Care plans reflected people's communication needs.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had access to varied activities seven days a week, including arts, music, gardening, swimming, shopping, college and holidays.
“A comprehensive activities programme was in place with a range of different things available for people every day.” from the report
Improved decision-making practice
The home had improved its approach to mental capacity decisions. People were consulted during best-interest meetings before DoLS applications were made.
“The provider had made improvements. For example, people were now consulted as part of best interest meetings, before DoLS applications were made.” from the report
Limited complaints information
minorOnly a few complaints had been made, so the home could not identify clear trends or themes. This does not show that care was poor, but it limits what the inspection could learn from complaints.
“Few complaints had been made about the service, not enough to draw any conclusions about trends or themes.” from the report
- 01How do you currently check that DoLS conditions are being followed and that restrictions remain necessary and least restrictive?
- 02How will you involve my relative, family or an advocate in mental capacity assessments and best-interest meetings?
- 03How will you support my relative's particular communication needs, including any use of Makaton, pictures, technology or body language?
- 04What activities and community trips could my relative take part in, and how would these be adapted to their interests and health needs?
- 05How do you monitor medicines, medication errors and near misses, and what learning has followed from any recent incidents?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection of the whole service covering all five CQC questions, including care, accommodation, medicines, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 April 2020 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 Oakdown House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 2011.
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.