CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oaklands
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, individual risk assessments, safeguarding systems and good infection control. At the visit, there was no water safety and legionella risk assessment, but the manager provided one after the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff assessed people's needs and choices, received training and worked with health and social care professionals. Food, the building and activities were adapted to people's needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff respected people's privacy, dignity, choices and independence. They got to know people before stays and supported decision-making, including for people who did not communicate verbally.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was individual and followed people's routines, interests and communication methods. Families were kept in contact through communication books and other communication.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was well run and had a positive, inclusive culture. However, inspectors recommended stronger policies, procedures and quality monitoring that reflect the particular risks of short-term respite care.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found caring, personalised support, with improvements needed in quality checks and respite-service risk procedures.
This was the first planned inspection since the home registered. Inspectors visited on 15 October 2019, observed support, spoke with staff, relatives and a health professional, and checked care and management records. They also used information from a review of the provider's group office processes.
The home provides short breaks for people with a learning disability. Up to two people can stay overnight at once. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew them well. Support was based on people's routines, communication needs, interests and choices.
The home was clean and had enough staff. Staff used positive behaviour support and restrictive practices only as a last resort. The sensory room and garden activities were designed around people's needs.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The overall Good rating means inspectors found consistently good care and management, although they recommended stronger checks and procedures for the specific risks of a short-break service.
Staffing and safety
There were enough staff, and staffing was adjusted to people's needs. Staff supporting people were familiar and consistent.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were adapted according to the needs of the people using the service at the time.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff learned about people before they used the home. They followed familiar routines and supported individual interests and preferences.
“People received support that was individual to their needs and preferences.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff treated people with dignity and offered choices. They supported people to keep their independence and respected their right to privacy and space.
“Staff were mindful that people using the service required one to one support which could be intrusive.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingThe provider's checks did not always reflect the specific risks of a respite service. Inspectors also found that action plans did not clearly show what had been done or how actions were being reviewed.
“Identified actions had been incorporated in to an action plan however there was no detail to show what actions had been taken in response and how these were kept under review.” from the report
Water safety records
needs fixingWater temperatures were monitored, but there was no water safety and legionella risk assessment at the inspection. The manager provided an assessment after the visit.
“We found whilst water temperatures in the service were being monitored there was no risk assessment in relation to water safety and legionella.” from the report
Changes in people's support
needs fixingInspectors found there was no clear, robust procedure for checking changes to people's support needs when they came into or left the respite service.
“There was no clear robust procedure to check any changes to people's support who were coming in and out of the respite service.” from the report
- 01How do you check and record any changes in my relative's needs between short breaks?
- 02How is the water safety and legionella risk assessment kept up to date?
- 03How do you review actions from quality audits and show that they have been completed?
- 04If restrictive practices might be needed, what are they, how are they used as a last resort, and how are they reviewed?
- 05How will you keep my relative's routines, communication methods, interests and food preferences consistent during each stay?
This was the first planned inspection and covered all five key questions, including the premises and care; inspectors also used evidence from a provider-group office review on 16 September 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 November 2019 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
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 October 2018.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.