CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Oakhill Mansions
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risk assessments, medicines systems, staffing arrangements, recruitment checks and infection control were all considered safe, although water temperatures and occasional call bell delays needed attention.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong leadership, a positive culture, good quality monitoring and effective work with families and health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, March 2023
Oakhill Mansions rated Good; inspectors found safe, person-centred care and strong leadership, but noted some minor concerns and high water temperatures.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 and 7 March 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management documents.
The inspection found that people were safe. Risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained and infection control arrangements were in place. Staffing was planned around people's needs, although some people reported occasional delays with call bells.
The home was also found to be well-led. Inspectors described strong leadership, good partnership working and a positive culture focused on person-centred care. The overall rating stayed Good, as the other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection and were not inspected this time.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and knew what to do if they suspected abuse.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse. People told us they felt safe.” from the report
Strong leadership
Inspectors found leaders who understood the home well and were committed to improving person-centred care.
“There was a positive culture in the home where staff at all levels were committed to providing person centred care and delivering this to a high standard.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked closely with health and social care professionals, including to support people leaving hospital safely.
“The service worked collaboratively with all relevant external stakeholders and agencies.” from the report
Activities and wellbeing
The home had introduced wellbeing staff, explored people's interests and planned activities aimed at supporting social engagement and personal wishes.
“People's interests were explored, and they were linked with staff with similar interests.” from the report
High water temperatures
needs fixingRecorded temperatures were above the recommended level in some bedrooms and reached 50 to 60 degrees in some areas. Signage was added and a plumber was asked to inspect the outlets during the inspection.
“Water temperatures were being recorded. It was noted that these exceeded the recommended temperature of 44 degrees and some areas were 50 to 60 degrees in people's bedrooms.” from the report
Occasional call bell delays
minorTwo people said staff sometimes took a while to answer their call bells, especially in the morning. The home later provided audits showing prompt responses.
“Although two people told us there was occasional delays in staff answering their call bells.” from the report
Minor day-to-day concerns
minorThree people and a relative mentioned missing glasses, food not always being hot enough and a lack of suitable activities for one person. The home said it would follow these up.
“Three people and a relative did share some minor concerns in respect of missing glasses, the food was not always hot enough, and one person feeling there was a lack of suitable activities for them.” from the report
Limited survey responses
minorThe last survey recorded views from only 20 people. The home was reviewing how it collected people's views and planned a survey for people leaving its hospital discharge beds.
“The response to the last survey had only captured a response from 20 people.” from the report
- 01What was the outcome of the plumber's inspection of the water outlets, and how are water temperatures now checked?
- 02How quickly are call bells answered, and can you show us the latest call bell monitoring?
- 03How will you make sure activities suit people who have different interests and abilities?
- 04How do you collect feedback from people and relatives, including those leaving the hospital discharge beds?
- 05How are the named staff teams and wellbeing staff being used to support each person's wishes and goals?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 March 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, November 2017
Oakhill Mansions was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and individual care, with one mental capacity oversight fixed quickly.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 26 September 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files, training, staffing rotas and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably skilled staff, well-managed medicines, detailed care plans and kind, respectful care. People were offered activities and were supported to make choices.
Inspectors found one gap in mental capacity checks for people using bedrails. The manager corrected this within 48 hours, and inspectors confirmed the action had been completed on 28 September 2017. This was the home's first inspection since registering with the CQC.
Safe staffing
Inspectors saw enough staff across all three floors, including at lunchtime, and call bells were answered promptly.
“We saw there were enough staff and people received the care required to provide safe care and assistance.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans covered people's daily needs as well as their life histories, interests, likes and dislikes. Staff knew this information and used it to provide individual care.
“The care and support people received was highly individualised.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were described as caring and were observed protecting people's privacy, dignity and choices during care.
“Whilst at the service we saw people were treated in a kind, caring and respectful way by staff.” from the report
Activities and choice
People could take part in activities and trips based on their hobbies and preferences. Inspectors found new links with the local community were being developed.
“People participated in a range of individual and group activities based upon their hobbies and interests and, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used regular checks, feedback and improvement plans to identify and act on shortfalls.
“Sophisticated and comprehensive systems were in place to check on the standards within the service.” from the report
Bedrail consent checks
needs fixingFor people using bedrails, a risk assessment had been completed but their capacity to consent had not been assessed. The manager said this was an oversight and corrected it within 48 hours.
“However, where people had bedrails in place, we found that although a risk assessment had been completed, people's capacity to consent to them being in place had not been assessed.” from the report
- 01How do you check that capacity and consent are recorded before using bedrails or other equipment that may restrict movement?
- 02How do you assess and adjust staffing levels when people's needs change or the home is busy?
- 03How are each person's care plans reviewed when their needs, preferences or health change?
- 04How will you support my relative to take part in activities that match their interests?
- 05How are medicines audits and any errors or near misses followed up?
This was the home's first comprehensive inspection and covered all five key questions, with a follow-up check on 28 September 2017 for the mental capacity action. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 November 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 Oakhill Mansions
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 September 2016.
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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of
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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.