CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Oaks Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found progress, but safety risks, care planning and management systems still needed action.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 12 July 2023 and carried out inspection activity until 20 July. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home had improved its medicines management, nutrition records, staff training and parts of the building. People were generally supported with their health needs, food and drink, and legal requirements about consent were mostly followed.
However, some safety risks remained. Care plans did not give staff enough personalised guidance, including how to support people who became distressed. Call bells were not always within reach. Staff were busy and people did not always receive enough interaction or stimulation. The home remained in breach of regulations about safe care and treatment and good governance.
The overall rating remains Requires Improvement, as does Safe and Well-led. Effective improved from Requires Improvement to Good. Caring and Responsive were not assessed in this inspection, so their previous ratings were carried forward.
Medicines management
Medicine processes and records had improved. The home used guidance for thickening agents, hydration monitoring and topical creams where needed.
“The registered manager had introduced improvements to medicines management to ensure people received their medicines safely.” from the report
Food and drink support
Care plans included people's dietary needs and preferences. Referrals were made when people were at risk of losing weight.
“Care plans described people's eating and drinking needs and food likes and dislikes.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff had completed relevant training and induction. Staff said they received support through supervision and appraisal.
“Staff completed training to make sure they had the correct skills and knowledge to support people.” from the report
Safeguarding and learning
Staff understood how to report abuse, and incidents were recorded and reviewed. The home showed evidence of learning from accidents and incidents.
“Lessons were learned, and aspects of service provision were improved as a result of the learning.” from the report
Risks and distressed behaviour
seriousCare plans did not give staff enough clear guidance about personal care, identified support needs or how to respond when someone became anxious or upset. Records for monitoring distress were not always completed.
“Care plans were not yet person-centred with guidance for staff about how to support people with their personal care, or other identified support requirements.” from the report
Call bells
seriousCall bells were not always within reach of people in their rooms. This was a continued breach of the safe care and treatment regulation.
“Nurse call bells were not within reach of people when in their rooms if they needed to call for assistance.” from the report
Staff time and interaction
needs fixingAlthough there were enough staff to support people safely, staff deployment did not consistently meet people's social and emotional needs. Care was focused on tasks, and people were not all engaged or stimulated.
“Care was task-centred rather than person-centred. People were not all engaged or stimulated.” from the report
Management oversight
seriousAudits and checks were in place, but they had not yet identified or resolved all the problems with safety and person-centred care. The provider remained in breach of good governance.
“Enough improvement had not been made at this inspection and the provider remained in breach of regulation 17.” from the report
Odour and refurbishment
minorThe environment was improving, but some carpets still had an unpleasant smell. The refurbishment programme needed to continue in a timely way.
“Improvements had been made to infection control, however there was still a malodour to some carpets around the home.” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure every person has clear, personalised guidance for personal care and for responding to distress or agitation?
- 02How do you check that call bells are within reach whenever people are in their rooms?
- 03How many staff are deployed during busy periods, and how will you ensure people receive meaningful interaction and stimulation?
- 04What actions are in the current plan to address the Regulation 12 and Regulation 17 breaches, and when will each action be completed?
- 05When will the refurbishment and replacement of carpets be completed, and how are unpleasant smells being controlled meanwhile?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 August 2023 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 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind staff and enough staff, but serious shortfalls in safety, records, medicines and the home’s condition.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 28 February and 1 March 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and the home’s management records.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found risks were not always assessed properly, medicines records were not always reliable, and care records did not always give staff clear instructions.
The building had wear and tear, some areas were unclean, and there was not enough suitable furniture. The home did have enough staff, safe recruitment, staff training and a welcoming atmosphere. A new manager had been appointed but had not yet started, and the provider had produced an action plan.
Kind relationships
People and relatives were positive about staff kindness, friendliness and the way staff communicated with families.
“People and relatives were positive about staff kindness and support.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks were also carried out safely.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.” from the report
Staff training
Staff had training, induction and support through supervision and appraisals.
“Staff completed training to make sure they had the correct skills and knowledge to support people.” from the report
Mental capacity practice
Records showed that mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were appropriately completed. The report said the home was working within the relevant legal principles.
“Records showed mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were appropriately made and documented.” from the report
Working with professionals
Staff worked with other professionals to understand people's needs and support access to care.
“Staff communicated with a range of professionals to ensure that people's needs were considered and understood” from the report
Risks and medicines
seriousSome risks were not identified or managed well. Medicines records, fluid monitoring and records for thickening agents were not always accurate or consistent.
“People were at risk of unsafe care as systems were not in place to ensure people were kept safe from the risk of avoidable harm.” from the report
Incomplete care records
seriousSome care needs did not have care plans, and existing plans did not always give staff clear instructions. Information for hospital visits was also not always sufficient.
“Care plans were not all in place for each identified care need so staff had guidance in care records on how to meet those needs.” from the report
Condition of the home
needs fixingSome parts of the building showed wear and tear and needed decoration. There was not enough suitable furniture, and some bedrooms did not have adequate furniture for comfort and safety.
“There was insufficient seating around the home.” from the report
Cleaning and infection control
needs fixingAn infection control system was in place, but some areas were not clean and there was a bad smell. Some furniture and carpets were marked or unclean.
“An infection control system was in place. However, not all areas of the home were clean and there was a malodour.” from the report
Weak oversight
seriousThe provider's audits had not identified or dealt with several problems in good time. The home also did not have a registered manager in post during the inspection.
“The provider did not have effective systems in place to effectively monitor and improve the quality of the service” from the report
- 01What has been done to make sure every person's risks are identified, assessed and clearly explained to staff?
- 02How are you checking that medicines records, thickening-agent instructions and fluid records are now accurate?
- 03Has a registered manager started, and who is responsible for the home until then?
- 04Which repairs, cleaning work and refurbishment have been completed, and when will the remaining work be finished?
- 05How do you record each person's food likes, dislikes and dietary preferences, and make sure staff follow them?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 March 2023 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 The Oaks Care Home
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- August 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2023Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 May 2017.
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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Northumberland
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 £950 to £1,190 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 11 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.