CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakwell House
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- People were generally protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and risks were clearly recorded. However, medicines were sometimes given late and records did not always show clearly that medicines had been given.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed, regularly updated support plans. Staff supported people's health, diets, choices and independence, although one person said some staff were less skilled than others.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were supported to make decisions and staff respected equality and different identities. However, some people said they were not always matched with staff who suited them, and confidentiality was not always maintained.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support was personalised and people could take part in activities, maintain relationships and follow their interests. The home had a complaints process and people knew how to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The management team was visible and approachable, and there was a positive culture overall. However, there was no registered manager and quality checks had not identified concerns about medicines management.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; care was mostly good, but medicines, confidentiality and management checks needed improvement.
This was the first unannounced comprehensive inspection. One inspector visited on 12 and 15 September 2022. They spoke with five people and six staff, and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment, training and management records.
The home supported six people with learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found that people were generally supported to make choices, build independence, enjoy activities and access healthcare. The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were Good.
The Safe and Well-led ratings were Requires Improvement. Medicines were not always recorded properly, some people were not always matched with their preferred support workers, and confidentiality was not always maintained. There was also no registered manager and the provider's checks had not identified the medicines concerns.
Choice and independence
Staff focused on what people could do and supported them to make decisions, develop skills and become more independent.
“Staff focused on people's strengths and promoted what they could do, so people had a fulfilling and meaningful everyday life.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to take part in activities and social events linked to their interests, relationships and identities.
“People could take part in activities and pursue interests that were tailored to them.” from the report
Healthcare support
Staff understood people's health needs and supported them to use healthcare services when needed.
“People's healthcare needs were met.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousSome medicines were not recorded promptly or completely. The reason for giving as-needed medicines and the intended result were not always written down.
“We noticed some instances when the medicine administration chart (MAR) were not always signed to confirm the medicine was given.” from the report
Staff matching
needs fixingSome people said they were not always supported by staff who suited them. This affected how comfortable, engaged and stimulated they felt.
“People told us they did not always get the right support from staff because they were not always well matched with their designated support workers.” from the report
Confidentiality
needs fixingSome people said staff had discussed private information about residents and staff. The provider said it had taken action to remind staff about confidentiality.
“One person told us staff had not always maintained confidentiality.” from the report
Management oversight
needs fixingThere was no registered manager when inspectors visited. The provider's quality checks were in place but had not found the medicines management concerns.
“The providers quality assurance processes were in place however were not always effective.” from the report
- 01What has changed in the way medicines are recorded since inspectors found unsigned medicine charts?
- 02How do you record the reason and intended outcome when as-needed medicines are given?
- 03How will you make sure people are supported by staff who are a good match for them?
- 04What training and checks are now in place to prevent staff discussing people's confidential information?
- 05Who is responsible for managing the home while there is no registered manager?
This was the first unannounced comprehensive inspection and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 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 Oakwell House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 July 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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.