CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakley House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and support, worked with health professionals and helped people make choices. People were supported with eating, drinking, healthcare and developing independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well, respected their privacy and dignity, and involved them in decisions. People were supported to maintain relationships and do as much as possible for themselves.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People were supported with communication, activities, holidays, friendships and interests in the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong leadership, regular audits and good communication with people, families and staff. The home worked with other health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Oakley House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care.
This was an unannounced inspection on 12 March 2020. One inspector spoke with the manager, deputy manager, four care staff and three people living in the home. They also observed care and checked care records, complaints and management records.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. People said they felt safe and comfortable. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and staff who knew people well.
People were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in community activities. Care was personalised, communication needs were considered and staff worked with health professionals. All five areas inspected were rated Good.
The previous inspection was also rated Good, published on 30 September 2017. The ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led all remained Good.
People feel safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and comfortable. Staff knew how to recognise possible abuse and how to report concerns.
“I feel very safe here. There is always staff around.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's likes, dislikes, histories and preferred ways of receiving support. Care plans recorded personal choices and preferences.
“People received care that was personalised and responsive to their needs.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to build skills, take positive risks and do things for themselves.
“The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff treated people with dignity and privacy and supported them to maintain relationships with relatives, friends and the wider community.
“Staff were kind and caring and knew each person well.” from the report
Good leadership
The home had regular communication, staff meetings and quality checks. Action plans were used when audits identified shortfalls.
“There continued to be strong leadership within the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess whether my relative is compatible with the people already living in the home?
- 02What communication aids or accessible information would you use for my relative?
- 03How would you support my relative to take positive risks while keeping them safe?
- 04How would you support my relative to develop independence and take part in community activities?
- 05How are care plans and risks reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including the care provided and the home itself. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Oakley House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 August 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicines, recruitment, training and quality records.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities and had space for up to eight. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe medicines systems and appropriate recruitment checks. Staff understood people's needs and supported their choices, health, meals and activities.
People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Care plans were personalised and reviewed regularly. The home had systems to monitor quality, and complaints seen by inspectors had been investigated and resolved.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was unchanged from the previous inspection on 18 June 2015.
Enough staff
Inspectors found that staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs and were kept under review.
“People told us, and we saw, that there were enough staff available to meet their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked as competent to administer medicines. Records showed medicines were given as prescribed and stored correctly.
“Medicine Administration Records (MARs) showed that medicines were administered as prescribed and stored at the recommended temperatures.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were seen to be friendly, reassuring and attentive. They explained personal care and checked with people before helping them.
“We saw that the interactions between staff and people living at the home were kind, caring and friendly.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's routines, interests, preferences and life history. People were involved in planning activities and support.
“People's care records contained personalised information about them, such as their day time and evening care and personal support routines, hobbies, interests, food preferences and family/ life history.” from the report
Community activities
People were supported to choose and take part in activities such as swimming, shopping, cinema trips and time away from the home.
“People continued to have access to the community.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What has changed at the home since the Good inspection in August 2017?
- 02Have the planned improvements to the vehicle and garden areas been completed?
- 03Are all current Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications authorised, and are any conditions being followed?
- 04How are people's care plans and risk assessments reviewed now?
- 05How are people supported to choose their activities, meals and daily routines?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; the report says the registered manager was not available during the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 September 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 Oakley House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 2010.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 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.