CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oakwood Acquired Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention, testing, PPE and visiting arrangements.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 25 February 2021. It was carried out after concerns were received about infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found good practice during the visit. Staff and residents were included in Covid-19 testing, vaccinations had been offered, PPE was used correctly, and the home had signs about hand hygiene and social distancing.
Inspectors were also assured that visitors were protected from infection, admissions were safe, outbreaks could be managed, and the infection control policy was up to date. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Covid-19 testing and vaccination
The home was fully involved in testing, and vaccinations had been offered to people who wanted them.
“The service was fully engaged with the Covid-19 testing and vaccination programmes.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had effective arrangements for preventing and managing infections, including an up-to-date policy.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
PPE and hygiene
Staff followed government PPE guidance. PPE stations were available around the home, with signs encouraging hand hygiene and social distancing.
“Staff were seen to be following the current government guidance in relation to the personal protective equipment (PPE)” from the report
Family contact
People were encouraged to stay in contact with families and friends. Visiting arrangements had been adapted where local restrictions allowed.
“People who used the service were encouraged to maintain contact with their families and friends” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the testing and vaccination arrangements described in the report being maintained now?
- 02How do you currently manage visits when local restrictions or infection risks change?
- 03Where are PPE stations located, and how do you check that staff continue to use PPE correctly?
- 04What arrangements are in place to prevent and manage an infection outbreak?
- 05Can you explain the infection prevention and control policy currently used at the home?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 2021 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, March 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with staff supervision not always happening as often as planned.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 21 February 2019. One inspector reviewed information held by the CQC, asked local professionals for feedback, spoke with people living at the home, relatives, the manager and staff, and checked care plans, staff files, medicines records and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable medicines systems, clean premises and good safeguarding arrangements. People received support with food, health care, rehabilitation and daily living skills.
People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Care plans were detailed and activities were varied. Complaints were handled appropriately and quality checks were in place.
The main shortfall was that staff supervision did not always happen as often as the home's policy said it should. The manager knew about this and said they were working to address it. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection in November 2015, with no regulatory breaches.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely. Recruitment checks, including references and DBS checks, were completed before staff started work.
“Enough staff had been deployed to safely meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored securely and records were completed accurately. Staff had medicines training and the home took action after any errors.
“We found people's medication was administered, recorded and stored safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, patience, dignity and respect.
“Staff were observed to be kind, caring and patient in their interaction with people” from the report
Promoting independence
People were encouraged to take part in everyday tasks such as cooking, cleaning, laundry and managing money when they could. Staff also helped people build confidence using the local community.
“Staff were knowledgeable on the importance of promoting independence.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home offered varied activities and trips, including sport, swimming, cinema visits and learning opportunities. People could choose whether to take part.
“There were different activities available for people to participate in if they wished.” from the report
Staff supervision
needs fixingStaff supervision meetings did not always happen as often as set out in the home's policy. The manager was aware of this and said they were looking to improve it.
“Staff supervisions were not always carried out as often as described in the policy and procedure” from the report
- 01How often are staff supervision meetings now completed, and how do you check that they happen on time?
- 02How would you support my relative's rehabilitation and independence in cooking, laundry, personal care and accessing the community?
- 03How would you manage my relative's communication needs, swallowing risks or modified diet if these applied?
- 04What activities and trips are currently available, and how are they matched to each person's interests and abilities?
- 05How are medicines checked, and what action would you take if a medicines error occurred?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the accommodation and care provided both included. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 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 Oakwood Acquired Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Oakwood Acquired Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service →
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Oakwood Acquired Brain Injury Rehabilitation Service →
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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 Stockport
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. 88 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.