Archived: Waltham House Limited Also known as Oasis Care

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement.This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans were not always person centred and did not always reflect people’s wishes and needs. For example, one person enjoyed a specific diet which not all staff were aware of, and this meant they did not receive meals which were important to them.

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity.We could not be assured care plans were up to date. This meant that people may not have received continuity of support to meet their needs when moving between services.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

We received mixed feedback from people regarding information received, for example, some people had discussed their care plan and had a review, others were not sure if they had and not all were stored in people’s homes. The was no evidence of an accessible information policy in place.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result.

People and relatives gave mixed feedback regarding how the provider involved them in their care. Comments included, “They always answer, [the registered manager] has a mobile number, she is always at the end of a phone” and “I mostly ring [the registered manager] my sister sends emails, [the registered manager] is always very good.” While positive comments were received from people regarding their relationship with staff and the registered manager who knew people well, surveys or regular meetings with people and relatives were not in place. This meant the provider did not consistently involve people in sharing ideas and decisions about their care. Comments from people included, “I think [the registered manager] came one time and she asked me”, “Not recently, they know we are happy” and “Sometimes [the registered manager] rings me to see if I’m ok”.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service also ensured people were made aware of their rights and provided people with information on various situations.

There were no barriers to people accessing the service or their care and support. Out of hours support was in place, covered by the registered manager, to ensure staff always had access to support.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff had undertaken equality and diversity training.

Staff, people and family members did not identify any concerns about discrimination. One relative told us, “We requested female staff and they are all female”.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

At the time of our assessment no one was receiving support at the end of their life.