CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakleigh Residential Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Some bedroom door locks were not suitable and could have prevented people leaving or being assisted to leave quickly in an emergency. Inspectors found medicines, staffing, recruitment checks and risk assessments were otherwise managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received suitable food, healthcare support and care based on assessed needs. However, some staff training had not been completed and training records needed updating.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People and relatives were involved in care decisions and care plan reviews.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People could take part in activities, maintain relationships and raise complaints, and the home recorded a written response to the one complaint received.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had systems to monitor quality and safety. People, relatives and staff were asked for their views, and the report said changes suggested through feedback had been acted on.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but some bedroom door locks and training records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection over two days. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, staffing, medicines, training and management records.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People were described as treated with kindness and respect, with detailed care plans, suitable food, healthcare support and activities.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Some bedroom door locks could have slowed an emergency exit. The report also said some staff training had not yet been completed or recorded properly. Inspectors recommended improvements to door locks, infection control and training records.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed staff treating people with kindness and compassion. Staff also protected people's privacy and dignity.
“We observed people were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff group.” from the report
Personalised care planning
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, life histories and communication information. Staff showed they understood people's individual needs.
“Care plans were detailed, included risk assessments and provided staff with information based on people's personal care needs.” from the report
Medicines and staffing
Medicines were administered and stored safely. Inspectors found enough staff to provide care and support activities.
“We found there were enough staff to undertake all care tasks and to assist with activities in the home and into the local community.” from the report
Good management oversight
The registered manager used audits, meetings and questionnaires to monitor the home and respond to feedback.
“The registered manager had auditing systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service” from the report
Bedroom door locks
seriousSome bedroom door locks were unsuitable and could have delayed a person's exit or assistance in an emergency. The provider was told to use suitable locks where people required them.
“Some of the bedroom door locks were not suitable and could prevent people leaving or being assisted to leave their bedroom in an emergency.” from the report
Incomplete training records
needs fixingSome staff had not started training courses linked to people's specific needs, and records did not contain all relevant qualification information. Inspectors recommended that the records be brought up to date.
“The range of training offered to a small number of staff did not ensure they were enabled or informed to provide detailed care to people.” from the report
- 01Have all bedroom door locks been changed to types that can be opened quickly in an emergency?
- 02Which staff still need training for people's specific needs, including activities for people with dementia?
- 03Have the training records been updated to show all courses and recognised qualifications?
- 04What improvements have been made to infection control since the inspection?
- 05How are care plans and end of life choices kept up to date when people's needs or preferences change?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home covering all five CQC questions, with ratings compared with the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 December 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Oakleigh Residential Home Limited was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with some gaps in activities, records and policies.
Inspectors visited without warning on 11 May 2017. This was a comprehensive inspection, covering all five CQC areas. They reviewed care records, staff files and service documents, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and observed care.
The home was rated Good overall, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from harm, received their medicines as prescribed, and had access to food, drinks and health care.
People were treated kindly and respectfully. Their care plans described their needs and preferences, and staff supported people to make choices and remain independent. Some people wanted more activities and more variety. Inspectors also found some records and policies needed updating.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, and staff understood how to recognise and report abuse. Risk assessments and guidance were in place to support people safely.
“People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm by staff who knew their responsibilities for supporting them to keep safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with warmth, kindness and compassion. They respected privacy, dignity, personal choices and independence.
“Throughout the day of our inspection visit, we observed that staff interacted with people in a warm and kind manner and took time to talk to people before proceeding with their tasks.” from the report
Individual care
Care plans included people’s needs, preferences, routines and life history. Staff used this information to provide personalised support.
“Care plans contained information about people's preferences and usual routines.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Inspectors observed medicines being given according to the home’s procedures and prescriptions.
“People received their medicines safely.” from the report
People’s health and nutrition
People had choices of meals and drinks, including meals for dietary needs. Records showed that staff referred people to health professionals and recorded the outcomes.
“People were supported to maintain good health and could usually access health care services when needed.” from the report
Not enough activities
needs fixingSome people felt there were not enough activities or enough variety. Staff also said there could be more to do, particularly in the afternoons.
“There are not really a lot of activities for me. They are more for people with dementia. I do get bored.” from the report
Limited garden access
needs fixingSome people could not use the garden freely because it had direct access to the road and they needed supervision. The home said gates would be purchased and fitted after the inspection.
“I would like to go out in the garden more but there aren't many of us who can go out because it is so easy to get on the road.” from the report
Evacuation plans not dated
needs fixingSome personal evacuation plans did not show when they had been reviewed, and some had been in place for several years. The home agreed to review and date them.
“However, these did not all have dates on to show that they had been reviewed and some had been in place for a number of years.” from the report
Some feedback actions unfinished
minorPeople’s suggestions were recorded, but not all agreed actions had been completed. One example was a request for pictures and named staff details on bedroom doors.
“However, these had not always been completed.” from the report
Outdated policies and records
needs fixingSome documents were not dated, and some policies were not suitable or fully up to date. The safeguarding policy did not include categories of abuse introduced in 2015.
“We also found that the safeguarding policy had been reviewed in the last 12 months but had not been updated to include new categories of abuse that had been introduced in 2015.” from the report
- 01What activities and trips are now available, including activities for people who do not have dementia and more afternoon activities?
- 02Have the promised gates been fitted so people can use the garden more freely and safely?
- 03Have all personal evacuation plans been reviewed and dated to show they reflect current needs?
- 04Has the safeguarding policy been updated to include all the categories of abuse introduced in 2015?
- 05How are actions from residents’ meetings tracked to make sure they are completed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 June 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 Oakleigh Residential Home Limited
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Oakleigh Residential Home Limited →
- June 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Oakleigh Residential Home Limited →
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leicestershire
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. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.