CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakleigh Lodge Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found better staffing, medicines management and leadership, but some safety improvements were not yet fully established.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 27 November 2020. Inspectors checked whether the home had acted on three warning notices from the previous inspection. They reviewed care and medicines records, staff recruitment and training records, accident records, quality checks and infection control arrangements. They also spoke with one resident, two relatives and three staff members.
The home had improved since the previous inspection. Staffing had increased, including an extra member of staff at night. Risk assessments, fire evacuation plans, medicines checks and staff training had improved. Inspectors found people felt safe, medicines were generally managed safely, and infection prevention arrangements were suitable during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because some medicines guidance was still not clear and improvements were not yet fully embedded in everyday practice. Well-led was rated Good because management oversight, audits and action plans had improved. This inspection only assessed Safe and Well-led, so other question ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Improved staffing
Staffing levels had increased, including an additional member of staff at night. Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs and that recruitment and training checks were appropriate.
“Staffing levels had been increased since the last inspection with an extra staff member on site during the night.” from the report
Safer medicines practice
Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely during the inspection. Controlled medicines were given with two staff present, and medicines records reviewed by inspectors were accurate.
“Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Better risk management
Risk assessments and care plans gave staff guidance about falls, pressure areas and weight loss. Fire evacuation plans had also been updated for every resident.
“All people living at the service had personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEP).” from the report
Improved management checks
The provider and manager had introduced regular audits covering areas such as medicines, care plans, training, health and safety and infection control. They also used accident reviews to identify patterns and reduce risks.
“Effective audits and checks were now in place which included the environment, health and safety, medicines, training and supervision, care plans and infection control.” from the report
Positive relationships
Inspectors saw a relaxed atmosphere and said staff spoke about residents with care and compassion. Residents, relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the home.
“The culture of the service was positive and inclusive.” from the report
As-needed medicines guidance
needs fixingSome charts for as-needed medicines did not clearly explain when the medicine should be given for the individual resident. The manager knew about this and was working to improve it.
“These were not always detailed or personalised to individuals, meaning that the guidance for staff when to give these medicines was not clear.” from the report
Improvements still bedding in
needs fixingInspectors found that the home had improved, but its policies and procedures were still at an early stage and needed more time to become routine practice.
“These improvements were at an early stage and policies and procedures were not yet fully embedded into everyday practice.” from the report
- 01How have you improved the personalised instructions for residents' as-needed medicines, and how do you check that staff follow them?
- 02How is the extra night staff arrangement working, including when the sleeping staff member needs to be woken?
- 03What checks show that the new risk assessments, medicines procedures and care plans are now fully embedded in everyday practice?
- 04What has the home learned from the safeguarding concerns raised after the previous inspection?
- 05How are audits and accident reviews being used to identify and act on new risks?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the other question ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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 Requires Improvement, with Safe rated Inadequate; inspectors found serious risks in medicines, staffing, fire safety and care oversight.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 17 February 2020. They observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff, the manager and provider, and checked care records, medicine records, staff files and management documents.
They found people were exposed to avoidable risks. Medicines were not always given safely. Night staffing was not enough for people's assessed needs. Staff did not always have the training or guidance needed, and fire evacuation arrangements were not safe for everyone.
The home had not made enough improvement since the previous inspection. It had been rated Requires Improvement at the last three inspections, and the provider remained in breach of leadership and management requirements.
There were also positive findings. People generally described staff as kind and caring, felt respected, enjoyed the food and activities, and felt comfortable raising concerns. However, these strengths did not outweigh the safety and management problems.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives praised staff's caring nature. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity and privacy.
“People were treated in a respectful way and their privacy and dignity was maintained.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People could choose how to spend their time and were offered music, exercise, arts, crafts, reminiscence and trips out.
“External activity professionals regularly visited the home to offer both music and exercise sessions.” from the report
Food choices
People spoke positively about the food and could choose where to eat. Their requests, including second helpings, were supported.
“People were complimentary about the food and told us they were provided with choice.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, with staff using protective equipment and disposing of waste appropriately.
“The environment was clean, and people told us they were happy with the cleanliness of the home.” from the report
Unsafe medicines practice
seriousSome staff gave medicines without the required training or competence checks. Inspectors found errors with prescribed doses, an empty inhaler and unsafe arrangements for medicines needing closer monitoring.
“Some staff had not been supported to gain the necessary skills to ensure they delivered safe care before they supported people.” from the report
Insufficient night staffing
seriousOne staff member worked overnight for up to 14 people, despite some people needing two staff for repositioning, medicines or evacuation.
“There was one member of staff who worked overnight to provide care for up to 14 people.” from the report
Fire evacuation risks
seriousSome people's evacuation needs had not been assessed or kept up to date. Four lone workers had not completed fire training.
“These practices placed people at significant risk of harm.” from the report
Poor care guidance and risk assessments
seriousCare records did not always identify changing needs or explain how staff should support people with falls, wounds, nutrition, hydration and other health needs.
“Not all risks had been identified, assessed or managed effectively to ensure people's safety.” from the report
Weak management oversight
needs fixingAudits and quality checks failed to identify important problems. The provider had not sent the action plan requested after the previous inspection.
“The provider had not maintained sufficient oversight to ensure the service and quality of care continually improved.” from the report
Mental capacity and accessible information
needs fixingStaff did not always understand how to assess capacity and support best-interest decisions. Information about meetings was not always provided in a way people with sensory impairments could understand.
“We recommend the provider seeks further information and advice about MCA and its associated codes of practice” from the report
- 01How many staff now work overnight, and how do you make sure this matches each person's assessed needs?
- 02Who gives medicines overnight, and how are their medicines training and competence checked?
- 03How are fire evacuation plans kept up to date for people whose mobility or health has changed?
- 04How have you improved care plans and risk assessments for falls, wounds, dehydration and nutrition?
- 05What evidence can you show that the improvements promised after this inspection have been completed and checked?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that considered the premises, care and all five CQC questions, including the overall quality and safety of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Oakleigh Lodge Residential Home
5 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- December 2020Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Oakleigh Lodge Residential Home →
- April 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Oakleigh Lodge Residential Home →
- February 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Brighton and Hove
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 £1,280 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Lottie showed incredible patience and empathy, adapting her routine to fit in with Mum's moods. Most importantly, Lottie's cheerful manner helped Mum to get some enjoyment out of life.”
“He was infinitely patient with them and got on very well with us to the extent that we now regard him as a personal friend.”
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.