Oak Support

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Leaders used a quarterly management report to review information from complaints, any safeguarding concerns, incidents, spot checks and audits, and incorporated this into a service improvement plan. Apart from 2 low‑level complaints, no concerns had been identified, and the provider used these events to reinforce safe practice.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

The provider used structured assessments and care plans to support safe care pathways. The care plan set out clear information about the person’s needs. Risk management plans aligned with the care plan. These documents were kept under review, with care plan reviews scheduled and completed.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

A safeguarding adults’ policy in place, which included details of the safeguarding lead and how to raise concerns with the local authority safeguarding team. Staff had completed safeguarding adults and children training.

Staff were clear about how to respond if they had safeguarding concerns. A care worker explained, “I will report immediately to the registered manager. Safeguarding must be taken seriously and followed according to policy.”

The registered manager reported no safeguarding concerns since the service began and confirmed they knew how to contact the local authority safeguarding adults’ team if required.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Risk assessment and care planning were undertaken collaboratively. The person confirmed they felt involved in decisions about managing risks and their care. The registered manager, together with the person, assessed and identified risks to their safety, and how they were to be supported to manage those risks. Staff described how they balanced risk with independence, enabling the person to undertake tasks for themselves whilst remaining safe.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

An environmental risk assessment was completed to ensure the person’s home was safe for the person and for staff to work in.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The provider followed safe recruitment practices. Staff received an induction and had completed the care certificate. (The care certificate is a nationally recognised set of standards that equips health and care workers with the knowledge and skills to undertake their duties). In addition, staff also completed the provider’s mandatory training, including learning disability and autism training. Specialist training around the person’s health condition was delivered to staff by the registered manager who is a clinical nurse specialist within this area.

Staffing levels and rotas were organised to meet the person’s needs.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The provider had an infection prevention and control (IPC) policy in place and had appointed the registered manager as the IPC lead. Spot checks included reviewing personal protective equipment (PPE) use and adherence to infection prevention and control procedures. No concerns were recorded from these checks.

Staff reported they had consistent access to PPE. A care worker said, “We have gloves and aprons. We follow infection control when giving personal care.” This was confirmed by the person receiving care.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

The person was assessed as able to manage their own medicines, and this was reflected in their care records. Staff provided support through prompts and monitoring, particularly during periods of ill health when the person might need more support.

The registered manager confirmed that staff did not administer medicines directly but supported the person to remain independent and safe in managing their own regimen. Spot checks included the option to review staff medicines competence, although this was recorded as not applicable for the current package of care because the person self‑medicated.