CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oaklands Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, responsive care but gaps in safety records and quality checks.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 8 and 11 March 2022. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Effective, Caring and Responsive care. People were treated kindly, supported to make choices, given suitable food and helped to take part in activities. Staff knew people well and relatives generally felt the home was approachable.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Safe and Well-led. Some care plans and risk assessments lacked enough detail, medicines guidance was incomplete, and quality checks had not found these problems. The provider made some immediate improvements, but CQC said more time was needed to make them consistent.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw 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 people were treated with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect.” from the report
Good staff knowledge
Staff could explain people's needs and the risks linked to their care. They received training, supervision and a lengthy induction.
“Staff's knowledge of the people they supported was good and they were able to tell us about the risks associated with people's care and how to minimise these.” from the report
Choices and activities
People were offered choices about their care, meals and where to eat. The home provided activities and supported contact with relatives and friends.
“We observed people being given choices throughout the inspection.” from the report
Improved outcomes
Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good, improving from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
“At this inspection this key question has now improved to good.” from the report
Incomplete risk information
seriousSome care plans and risk assessments did not explain clearly enough what staff should do. One person had a medical device without a risk assessment available during the inspection.
“Not all care plans and risk assessments contained sufficiently detailed explanations of the control measures for staff to follow to keep people safe.” from the report
Medicines guidance
seriousSome as-needed topical medicines did not have accessible protocols, or the guidance was too general. This left staff without clear instructions about when to use the medicines or when to contact a GP.
“PRN protocols did not always include enough guidance to enable staff to administer the medication safely.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
needs fixingThe home's monitoring systems did not identify the missing detail in care records or the incomplete medicines protocols. Some actions from infection-control checks were also not recorded as completed.
“Systems and processes in place to monitor and identify shortfalls had not identified the concerns we found during this inspection.” from the report
Entry infection checks
needs fixingWhen inspectors arrived, their temperatures were not taken and a visiting questionnaire was not completed. Inspectors also noticed an unpleasant smell in communal areas and one bedroom.
“On arrival for the inspection we were asked to show evidence of our LFD test, hand gel was available at the entrance.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingSome staff files did not explain gaps in employment history, and one discrepancy between an application and a reference had not been checked. The provider said it had updated its process after the inspection.
“However, the provider had not always investigated all gaps in candidate's employment history.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the care plans and risk assessments since the inspection, especially for people with medical devices or sensor mats?
- 02How do staff now know when to give as-needed topical medicines, and when to contact a GP?
- 03How do you check that actions from infection-control audits have been completed and recorded?
- 04What checks are now made on gaps or discrepancies in applicants' employment histories?
- 05How will you show that the improvements in Safe and Well-led care are being maintained?
This was an unannounced, planned inspection of the whole care home, including all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the previous inspection rating was Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 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.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control, but visiting arrangements had caused concern.
This was a targeted inspection on 27 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at visiting arrangements and infection prevention and control. They also asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home had an outbreak of COVID-19 during the inspection. Inspectors found effective use of personal protective equipment, screening for visitors, safe admission arrangements and good cleaning. Staff showed knowledge of infection control procedures.
There had been concern that government guidance about visits outside the home was not always being followed. The home offered alternatives such as window visits, patio visits, video calls and indoor visits. After the inspection, relatives were given information about becoming essential care givers.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give a full quality rating for the home or a new rating for all five areas.
Infection control
Inspectors found that staff used protective equipment properly and understood infection control procedures.
“Throughout the inspection we observed staff demonstrating knowledge of good infection control practice.” from the report
Clean environment
The home looked clean and hygienic. Extra cleaning was carried out on frequently touched areas.
“We observed the home looked clean and hygienic.” from the report
Keeping families in touch
During outbreak restrictions, the home used several alternatives to ordinary visits to help people stay in contact with family and friends.
“Although outbreak restrictions were in place at the time of the inspection, alternative measures such as window visits, patio visits,video calls, emails and letters were utilised to update and maintain contact with family and friends.” from the report
Safe admissions
Inspectors found clear signs and procedures for people returning from hospital, including arrangements for isolation.
“We observed clear signage and procedures regarding isolation when people were re-admitted back to the home from hospital settings” from the report
Visiting arrangements
needs fixingThe inspection followed information that visits outside the home had not always followed government guidance. One family had not been allowed to take a person out of the home at Christmas, although alternative visits were offered.
“We received information that the service was not always following government guidance for visits outside of the care home.” from the report
- 01How are visits outside the home handled now, and how are individual risks assessed?
- 02How can a relative become an essential care giver, and what support will the home provide?
- 03What visiting options are available if there is a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 04How does the home manage isolation when someone returns from hospital?
- 05How are COVID-19-related staffing pressures affecting staffing levels and care?
This was a targeted inspection of visiting arrangements and infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 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 Oaklands Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- May 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 March 2021.
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.