You are here

Archived: Oak House Trust Limited Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 14 April 2016

We last inspected this service in June 2013 and found the provider was meeting all of the requirements of the regulations at that time. This inspection was unannounced and took place over two days on 4 and 5 February 2016.

Oak House Trust Limited, hereafter referred to as ‘Oak House’, is registered with CQC to provide accommodation with personal care for up to 16 people. The service caters for older men who live with a learning disability and / or sensory impairment. At the time of the inspection nine men were using the service. Oak House is required to have a registered manager in post. The registered manager had been registered as manager at the service since 2010. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People benefitted from a family orientated service where they enjoyed stability and long-term friendships and they were able to make a positive contribution to the daily running of their home. People took responsibility for jobs around the home and gardens, including growing vegetables, domestic chores, stock taking and caring for the hens and ducks. People were valued as individuals and were supported to maintain their independence, learn new skills and to sustain relationships with the people who were important to them. They enjoyed positive relationships with staff and regular activities with their local community, including curry nights and skittles. People’s safety and well-being was maintained through effective links with other community health providers and services. People were respected as individuals and their rights to make decisions about their lives were upheld. When people lacked capacity to make decisions, for example in managing their finances, the service needed to complete capacity assessments to evidence this. This work needed to be completed to ensure that Mental Capacity Act (2005) legislation was adhered to.

Staff enjoyed working at Oak House and the majority had worked at the service for many years. They worked well as a team and respected each other’s contribution, knowledge and experience. Staff felt well-supported and valued. They were able to speak openly and discuss issues or difficulties they, or the people they supported, were experiencing, so that solutions could be found. They cared for the people they supported and responded promptly to changes in people’s day to day well-being, to ensure they were safe. Staff acknowledged people’s contribution and hard work and went out of their way in their own time to provide opportunities for them including nights out and transport to their holidays.

The service worked openly and effectively with health service providers and local community services. They were working with the local authorities to complete an agreed action plan. Leadership was provided by the registered manager supported by the charity’s Board of Directors. They worked closely with staff and were always available to provide support and advice and knew of all significant events happening within the service each day. They worked inclusively with people and their families, staff and other organisations to provide the service in line with people’s wishes.

Inspection areas



Updated 14 April 2016

The service was safe. People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse because staff knew what to be aware of and how to report their concerns.

People were protected against health related and environmental risks.

Staff knew how to respond safely in the event of an emergency.

People's medicines were managed safely.

There were enough staff to meet people�s needs and recruitment practices protected people from the employment of unsuitable staff.


Requires improvement

Updated 14 April 2016

The service was effective. However, work needed to be completed to ensure that Mental Capacity Act (2005) legislation was adhered to.

People were supported by staff with the knowledge and skills to carry out their roles. Staff understood people�s needs and preferences.

People had access to a healthy diet which promoted their health and well-being, taking into account their preferences and nutritional requirements.

People�s health care needs were met. Staff made prompt referrals to obtain specialist support where needed and specialist advice was followed.



Updated 14 April 2016

The service was caring.

Staff developed positive relationships with people who used the service. People were treated with respect, kindness and compassion.

People felt listened to and had been involved in making decisions about their care.

People�s dignity and privacy was maintained and their independence was promoted.



Updated 14 April 2016

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care and were routinely consulted to gain their views about the support they received.

Staff knew people very well and could tell us about their individual preferences and interests. People were enabled to maintain relationships with those who mattered to them.

When people�s needs changed their care was adjusted to reflect this and their care records updated.

There were arrangements in place for people to raise their complaints and to have these listened to, taken seriously and addressed.



Updated 14 April 2016

The service was well led.

People benefitted from an open and inclusive culture. The provider�s �family centred� values were demonstrated by staff in their interactions with people and with each other.

The registered manager was accessible to staff, people and their representatives. They were open to feedback to improve the quality of the service and felt supported by the provider�s Board of Trustees. Staff felt supported and understood their roles and responsibilities.

People�s wishes and their relative�s views were taken into account by the registered manager when assessing the quality of the service.