You are here

Oak View Residential Care Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

We carried out an inspection of this service in April 2015 and found the provider was not meeting the legal requirements in relation to standards of care and welfare for people who use the service. Care and treatment had not been designed to meet people’s needs or preferences. There was a failure to ensure systems and processes were in place to assess, monitor and mitigate the risks relating to the health, safety and welfare of people, or to record and investigate incidents and accidents at the home. We carried out an unannounced inspection of this home on 10 August 2016 and found the provider had made improvements in these areas and was now meeting the requirements of these regulations.

The home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 34 older people, some of whom live with dementia and mental health conditions. Accommodation is arranged over two floors with stair lift access to the second floor. At the time of our inspection 34 people lived at the home.

A registered manager was in post. 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 were supported by staff who had a good understanding of how to keep them safe, identify signs of abuse and report these appropriately. Robust processes to check the suitability of staff to work with people were in place. There were sufficient staff available to meet the needs of people and they received appropriate training and support to ensure people were cared for in line with their needs and preferences.

Medicines were administered, stored and ordered in a safe and effective way.

Risk assessments in place informed plans of care for people to ensure their safety and welfare, and staff had a good awareness of these. External health and social care professionals were involved in the care of people and care plans reflected this.

People were encouraged and supported to make decisions about their care and welfare. Where people were unable to consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people were legally deprived of their liberty to ensure their safety, appropriate guidance had been followed.

People received nutritious meals in line with their needs and preferences. Those who required specific dietary requirements for a health need were supported to manage these.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. Staff involved people and their relatives in the planning of their care. The home used closed circuit television and locks on bedroom doors to promote the privacy, dignity and safety of people.

Care plans in place for people reflected their identified needs and the associated risks. Staff were caring and compassionate and knew people in the home very well.

Effective systems were in place to monitor and evaluate any concerns or complaints received and to ensure learning outcomes or improvements were identified from these. Staff encouraged people and their relatives to share their concerns and experiences with them.

The service had effective leadership which provided good support, guidance and stability for people, staff and their relatives. Relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager and their team of staff.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

The service was safe.

Risk assessments were in place to support staff in mitigating the risks associated with people’s care.

Staff had been assessed during recruitment as to their suitability to work with people and they knew how to keep people safe. There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were managed in a safe and effective manner.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported effectively to make decisions about the care and support they received. Where people could not consent to their care the provider was guided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had received training to enable them to meet the needs of people. They knew people well and could demonstrate how to meet people’s individual needs.

People received nutritious food in line with their needs and preferences

Caring

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

The service was caring.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff were caring and considerate as they supported people. People were valued and respected as individuals and were happy and content in the home.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

The service was responsive.

Care plans reflected the identified needs of people and the risks associated with these needs.

People were supported to participate in events and activities of their choice and were encouraged to remain independent.

Systems were in place to allow people to express any concerns they may have and complaints were recorded and responded to in a timely way.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 September 2016

The service was well led.

People spoke highly of the registered manager and their team of staff. Staff felt very well supported in their roles.

Robust audits and systems were in place to ensure the safety and welfare of people in the home.