The Oaks

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Assessments were comprehensive and reviewed regularly, covering health, wellbeing, communication, sensory needs, and personal goals. People and relatives were involved in assessments using methods suited to their communication styles, ensuring their views were considered and reflected in care planning. A healthcare professional commented, “I am pleased with how they [staff] keep us updated regarding any changes. We work well together when reviewing people’s care needs.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People received personalised care because their care plans were developed based on a deep understanding of their needs, strengths, and aspirations. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated to reflect any changes, ensuring that support remained relevant and effective. This was evident after one person had a medication review with the GP.

The provider used universally recognised tools to continually assess people’s needs. Nutrition and hydration were carefully supported in a way that respected individual tastes and preferences. Staff paid close attention to recording people’s food and fluid intake, enabling them to respond quickly to any changes and work collaboratively with health professionals to promote people’s overall wellbeing. People who were at risk of choking were appropriate assessed with input from the speech and language team.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Assessment information was shared appropriately, so people did not need to repeatedly provide their history or needs when accessing different services, for example, hospital passports were in place to share important information with external professionals. This supported continuity of care and reduced anxiety.

People’s goals, dreams, and aspirations were always communicated so a consistent approach was maintained between services. The service was supporting people in line with the ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ principles.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control.

Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Staff supported people to make informed choices about their health, adapted activities to individual needs, and provided emotional support to build confidence and independence. By creating a supportive and inclusive environment, staff empowered people to take more control over their own health and well-being.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Staff actively encouraged social interaction by facilitating group activities, supporting friendships, and organising outings to local clubs, events and social activities. For those who preferred quieter environments or had sensory sensitivities, staff offered tailored alternatives, such as one-to-one walks or home-based creative activities. These opportunities helped reduce social isolation, boosted emotional resilience, and supported mental health by fostering a sense of belonging and inclusion.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Care plans included clear mental capacity assessments. When people lacked capacity for specific decisions, best‑interest decisions were made with them, their relatives, or an independent advocate. Where individuals had no family support, the provider sought advocacy services to ensure their views were represented.

For anyone subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), the provider ensured appropriate authorisations were in place and that all conditions were met and monitored, reflecting a strong commitment to protecting people’s rights.

External professionals raised concerns about possible CCTV use in the home. At the time of inspection, no CCTV was operated in communal areas or in people’s bedrooms. The registered manager explained, “We did consider it but it was never actually used, and we won’t be using it. The intention was right, but we have updated our policies now and on reflection it wasn’t the best idea. It’s a lesson learned”.