CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Oxley Woodhouse
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, appropriate staffing, safe recruitment and safe medicines management. The home also had safeguarding procedures, fire safety measures and records of accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and appraisal, and people were supported with their physical, mental health and social needs. Inspectors recommended seeking guidance because the new Mental Capacity Act paperwork did not clearly record best interest decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Relatives described staff as caring, kind and respectful. Inspectors saw staff communicating appropriately, supporting privacy and dignity, and helping people maintain independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were person-centred and included people's preferences, communication needs and support hours. People were supported with activities, family contact and access to the local community, although end of life wishes were not recorded in enough detail.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was visible and approachable, and relatives and staff gave positive feedback. Audits, meetings, surveys and action plans were used to monitor and improve the home.
What inspectors found, August 2018
Oxley Woodhouse was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 13 June 2018. Inspectors reviewed information held about the home, observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional, and checked care, recruitment, training, incident and audit records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management and detailed risk assessments. People were supported with their health, communication, independence, activities and community links.
The home was meeting requirements and remained Good, as it had been at the previous inspection in January 2016. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns, but recommended improving records of best interest decisions. They also identified limited recording of people's end of life wishes.
Managing risks
The home identified individual risks clearly and gave staff practical guidance. Inspectors found accidents and incidents were reviewed appropriately.
“Risk assessments were detailed and contained clear directions for staff to ensure risk was managed well.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described how people wanted to be supported and included their preferences and communication needs. People were helped to retain independence and make choices.
“We found care plans were very person centred and explained how people like to be supported” from the report
Activities and community life
People had a wide choice of activities and were supported to use local facilities and maintain relationships in the wider community.
“People were supported to access the local community and leisure amenities.” from the report
Management and improvement
The manager was visible and approachable. The home used audits, feedback, meetings and action plans to monitor the service.
“Regular support visits, audits and quality assurance checks took place with overview from the registered provider.” from the report
Best interest records
needs fixingInspectors found that newly introduced Mental Capacity Act forms did not clearly evidence best interest decisions. The service was advised to seek guidance and improve these records.
“We found these forms no longer evidenced best interest decisions.” from the report
End of life wishes
needs fixingCare plans contained very limited information about people's person-centred end of life wishes. The manager agreed to discuss and record these wishes with relatives.
“We found care plans contained very limited information regarding person centred end of life wishes.” from the report
Earlier supervision arrangements
minorThe manager said that, before April 2018, not all staff had received supervision in line with the home's policy. The report says regular supervision had been held or scheduled for all staff from April 2018.
“recognised prior to this date not all staff had received supervision in line with organisational policy.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the Mental Capacity Act paperwork so best interest decisions are recorded clearly?
- 02How do you discuss and record each person's end of life wishes with them and their relatives?
- 03Are all staff now receiving supervision regularly and in line with the home's policy?
- 04How do you make sure people continue to have activities, community access and support for their independence?
- 05How do you use feedback, audits and action plans to check that improvements are completed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the Good ratings continued from the previous inspection in January 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 August 2018 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 Oxley Woodhouse
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 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 Kirklees
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. 86 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.