Oldfield Manor

At the time of our visit 16 people were living at the home.

We found the following examples of good practice.

The home had comprehensive policies and procedures to manage any risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. This included an operational plan in the event of an outbreak in the home of this viral infection. The policies, procedures and risk assessments were updated regularly following any changes in national guidance.

People living in the home and their next of kin were supported to maintain contact through a range of methods including visit appointments in a ‘pod’ or ‘booth’, skype video and the telephone.

The home management team were reviewing best practice guidance to ensure safe visiting arrangements for people in the home from next month in accordance with recent government announcements.

There was an ample supply of PPE for staff and any visitors to use. Hand sanitiser was stored securely but available to staff throughout the home. Staff had received training on the use of PPE and we observed staff wearing it correctly during our inspection. Clear signage and information was in place throughout the home to remind staff of their responsibilities.

The home employed two housekeepers and daily cleaning schedules were undertaken and these were enhanced with additional touch point cleaning.

A programme of regular COVID-19 testing for both people in the home and staff was implemented. Screening procedures were also in place for visitors to the home.

The home was participating in the COVID-19 vaccination programme.

Oldfield Manor is a residential care home providing personal care to 15 people at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 17 people in one adapted building. Bedrooms comprised of 15 single bedrooms and one double bedroom, five of which had en-suite facilities, spread over two floors. There was a lift to access the first floor. There was sufficient washing and toilet facilities for people. People had access to a number of communal areas, including quiet spaces and a garden.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People received care and support that was exceptionally person-centred and was embedded in the service. The registered manager and staff had an excellent understanding of people’s needs and desired outcomes. Electronic care plans holistically reflected people’s needs in a personalised way and identified people’s choices, wishes, preferences and things that were important to them. We saw people had achieved extremely positive outcomes. A person told us, “I have a much better quality of life here.”

The registered manager and staff were passionate about supporting people to develop and maintain relationships and people were exceptionally well supported to take part in activities to avoid social isolation. We saw exceptional examples of how people had made significant improvements and achieved their goals as a result of the support from the service.

People told us they felt safe. Staff were knowledgeable regarding safeguarding and had access to policies and procedures. Risk assessments had been completed to keep people safe and equipment was regularly serviced. Accidents and incidents were recorded, and evidenced lessons learned. Robust recruitment systems and processes were in place. The premises were clean, and staff followed infection control and prevention procedures.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People's needs were assessed, and care was planned and delivered to meet legislation and good practice guidance. People were provided with a nutritious and varied diet. Staff were supported through induction, robust training and regular supervisions and appraisals.

Staff were kind and caring. People told us, “I like the staff, they are caring. They make my life better” and “The staff are good. They talk to me in a kind way. The staff are the best thing about living here.” People appeared comfortable around staff. Consideration had been made to the Equality Act 2010 and people were protected against any discrimination. People told us staff respected their privacy and dignity and supported them to be as independent as possible.

The service was well-led. We received positive feedback about the registered manager and staff felt supported in their roles. The registered manager ensured they sought feedback about the service from people, family, external professionals and staff to drive and improve the service. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care provided and continuously improve the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 18 May 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

At the last inspection the service was rated overall Good. This was an unannounced inspection which took place on the 19 and 20 April 2017. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service was meeting all the relevant fundamental standards. People who used the service told us they felt safe and well cared for. Risk assessments were in place to keep people safe.

New staff members were expected to undertake an induction prior to commencing their employment. Staff members told us they felt supported in their roles and were adequately trained to meet the needs of people who used the service.

People who used the service told us staff were caring. We saw people were supported to remain independent.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were regular opportunities for people who used the service to access the local community and partake in activities within the service. Care plans in place were person centred and people were involved in the reviewing of these.

All the people we spoke with, including their relatives, knew who the registered manager was and told us they were approachable. The service had effective processes and systems in place to ensure the service was monitored and improved.

The registered manager told us the service was undergoing a programme of refurbishment. We saw one bedroom had been modernised and the kitchen was being extended. Further work was being planned.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People told us they were happy with the care and support they received. We observed staff treating people in a friendly and respectful way. People told us they were happy with the care and support they received and had no complaints about the service. Comments from people living in the home included, 'It's a good place and staff are kind to me', 'I am well looked after here'. A visitor said, 'I can't fault the care; it's a nice place'.

The staff team was stable and all staff had undertaken training that gave them the skills and knowledge to meet peoples' needs. People were happy with the staff team. Comments included, 'They have been here many years; they are very good' and 'Staff are very nice'.

We found that work had been done to improve the shower room and ensure the safety of people who use the service.

We found there was an up to date homes maintenance log which identified how the premises would be maintained with timescales.

During a brief tour of the home we found the home to be clean and warm.

We found that an extractor fan had been installed in the communal smoking area which ensured the home was free from preventable offensive odours.