Oak Support

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 were at the centre of their care choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People received person‑centred care that reflected their preferences, routines and what mattered most to them. Care was tailored to the individual and reviewed regularly to ensure it met their evolving needs. Assessments and care plans were developed collaboratively and incorporated the person’s views and how support would be delivered.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff delivered consistent and coordinated care effectively. The service ensured continuity by allocating a small, stable staff team, and staff worked well together to provide seamless support. The registered manager had specifically matched staff to the person based on their preferences and needs, ensuring compatibility.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Communication with the person was open and regular, ensuring they understood their support and felt fully informed. Staff ensured information was shared in a way the person understood.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider actively listened to people’s views and involved them in decisions about their care. Feedback was encouraged, acted upon promptly, and used to improve people’s experiences. The person confirmed they were regularly asked for feedback and felt their views directly shaped the support they received.

The provider made sure that people could access the care and support they needed when they needed it.

People had equitable access to the service, and support was adapted to ensure their needs, preferences and circumstances were met. Adjustments were made to promote inclusion, safety and choice.

The service ensured the person’s preferences for female staff were respected, demonstrating commitment to equitable access that accounted for personal comfort, privacy and cultural considerations. Care plans clearly documented this preference, and staff confirmed it was followed consistently.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

The service promoted equitable experiences by ensuring care was consistent, respectful and adapted to the person’s preferences. Outcomes were positive, and the person felt understood, safe and well supported. Staff respected people’s identity, personal routines and need for consistency.

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, the registered manager confirmed the person receiving support did not wish to discuss topics such as end‑of‑life planning, the service respected this choice and continued to plan around their expressed expectations, preferences and wellbeing.