Oak Support

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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 was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The provider carried out a comprehensive initial assessment before delivering care. This included meeting with the person and understanding what support they would like and how they would like it to be delivered. The registered manager explained that it was a collaborative approach and they co-produced the care and support plan with the person receiving care to ensure it was inline with their wishes.

Care staff confirmed they received the full care plan and risk assessments before providing support, ensuring they understood how to support the person.

The person receiving care told us they were fully involved in planning and reviewing their support. They also confirmed reviews took place regularly.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care 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.
 

The care delivered reflected the person’s individual health needs and was aligned with evidence‑based approaches for supporting someone with their specific needs. The registered manager used their expertise to ensure assessments and care plans were clinically informed and staff were trained in recognising changes in the person’s health. They said they were able “to train staff in what to look for and how to support [the person],” ensuring safe and consistent practice.

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.

Staff worked well together to deliver coordinated, consistent and safe care. Communication across the small staff team was reliable, and staff liaised effectively with the registered manager and external professionals when needed.

Care workers described strong teamwork and clear communication processes. They consistently handed over important information between care staff to ensure everyone remained up to date with the person’s care needs. A staff member said, “Teamwork is good. We write clear notes and we tell the next care worker what happened during the shift.”

Although the service had limited need to coordinate with external professionals, staff followed instructions from healthcare services such as community nurses promptly.

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 the person to maintain their health, wellbeing and independence. They encouraged participation in meaningful activities, helped them remain involved in family life, and promoted healthy routines within the limits of their fluctuating condition.

Staf promoted nutrition and hydration in line with the person’s health needs. Staff were attentive to changes in the person’s health and encouraged them to follow healthy routines.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care 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.

The service used several quality assurance processes to monitor outcomes. This included quarterly management reports, review of incidents (of which there had been none), regular spot checks, and analysis of complaints.

The person receiving care confirmed the provider regularly sought feedback to ensure the support provided continued to meet their needs and intended outcomes.

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

The provider supported people to give informed consent. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and consistently sought permission before providing care. Care records clearly documented capacity and decision‑making arrangements. The person receiving care confirmed staff always asked for their consent and involved them in daily choices.