CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakland (Rochdale)
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Safeguarding, risk, accident and incident systems were in place, and medicines were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and support needed to provide care. People's healthcare, eating and drinking, communication and decision-making needs were supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people's choices, privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and explained people's preferences and needs. Activities were available, but feedback about their consistency was mixed because the home did not have a full-time activities coordinator.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives and staff spoke positively about how the home was run. Audits, meetings, surveys and an improvement plan were used to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some inconsistency in activities and recent extra cleaning needed.
Inspectors visited without notice on 18 and 20 October 2023. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They also checked care records, risk assessments, medicines records, accident records and the home's quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives said they felt safe and were positive about the care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable care plans, timely healthcare referrals and kind, respectful support.
There were some areas to keep under review. Feedback about activities was mixed because there was no full-time activities coordinator. Extra deep cleaning was taking place after a local authority audit found that furniture had not always been moved during cleaning. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 8 November 2018.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff were deployed to keep people safe and meet their needs. Recruitment checks were also completed.
“Enough staff were deployed to keep people safe and meet their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors observed positive relationships and found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“People were treated with dignity and respect, by staff who knew people's needs and how best to support them.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans contained detailed information about people's likes, dislikes, preferences and how they wanted to be supported.
“Care plans were detailed and explained how people wanted to be cared.” from the report
Strong oversight
The home used regular checks, surveys, meetings and an improvement plan to monitor care and respond to feedback.
“An overarching improvement plan was used to document any required actions from audits and monitoring.” from the report
Activities were not always consistent
needs fixingPeople gave mixed views about activities. The absence of a full-time coordinator had affected whether activities took place consistently.
“The current absence of a full-time coordinator had impacted upon activity completion.” from the report
Extra cleaning was needed
needs fixingA local authority audit had found that furniture was not always moved during cleaning. Additional deep cleaning was being carried out during the inspection.
“They had completed an audit the day before and noted furniture had not always been pulled out when rooms were cleaned.” from the report
- 01When will the full-time activities coordinator be appointed, and how will activities remain consistent in the meantime?
- 02What actions were taken after the local authority infection control audit, and how will the home check that furniture is moved during cleaning?
- 03What proportion of staff have now completed all required training, and when will the remaining training be completed?
- 04How does the home maintain staffing levels when staff from other homes or agency staff are needed?
- 05How are people's views about activities collected and used to improve the weekly programme?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five ratings, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements and visiting protections during the COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited the home on 11 February 2022. The visit was announced 24 hours beforehand and focused on infection prevention and control, as well as staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, admissions, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene, social distancing and infection outbreaks safely. Staff vaccination requirements were also being followed.
The home had updated its infection control competency checks, with records showing 96% compliance. Essential Care Givers could continue to visit, including when someone was very unwell or nearing the end of life.
This was a targeted inspection, so the home was inspected but not rated. The report does not provide a standard overall rating or ratings for most of the five questions.
Visitor safety
The home had procedures to control access and reduce the risk of infection for visitors and residents.
“Robust procedures were in place before any person was allowed access into the care home.” from the report
Infection control training
The home had updated its infection control competency checks, and records showed a high level of recorded compliance.
“The provider had recently updated its Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) staff competency assessment framework.” from the report
Essential Care Giver visits
Essential Care Givers could continue to visit without restrictions, including when a person was very unwell or nearing the end of life.
“Those with Essential Care Giver status continued to have unrestricted access into the care home.” from the report
Activities during restrictions
Live online broadcasts allowed people to take part in entertainment and exercise during outbreak restrictions.
“These events were 'live' and interactive which meant people were able to fully participate.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What measures were put in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures, and did these affect people's care?
- 02What action was being taken to reach full compliance with the infection prevention and control competency checks?
- 03How are visitors currently checked and supported to prevent infection?
- 04How are people supported to keep in touch with Essential Care Givers when infection restrictions are in place?
- 05What activities are available now if face-to-face entertainment or exercise sessions cannot take place?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide a full set of service ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 February 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 Oakland (Rochdale)
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 October 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Rochdale
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.