You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 February 2013
Date of Publication: 8 May 2013
Inspection Report published 8 May 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 27 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People who used the service experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

During this inspection there were 20 people using the service. We reviewed all of the information we received from the provider. The provider told us the objective of The Oaklands was to maximise ability and minimise disability. To promote people’s right to live an ordinary, meaningful life and to enjoy the rights and responsibilities of full citizenship.

The quality compliance manager showed us around the whole location. We saw that living environments were homely, safe, clean and well appointed. During our tour we met one of the people who used the service. The quality compliance manager introduced us and asked the person if they would like to show us their room which they agreed. We saw that the person had their own photos and personal effects in their room and had created their own personalised living space. We saw that other people’s rooms were also personalised and decorated to their own tastes to reflect their individuality.

We looked at the care records of six people who used the service. We saw evidence that consent had been obtained which showed that people who used the service and their relatives had been consulted on a range of issues in relation to care and support decisions. Relatives with spoke confirmed they had been involved in their family member’s care and consulted about care and support decisions.

The service operated a key-worker system whereby each person had a named staff member who supported them in all aspects of their care planning and in decisions about their care and support.

We saw evidence that people were involved in discussions about their care and treatment and supported to make suggestions to improve the service and influence how it was run. We saw that a range of methods were used to facilitate people’s involvement and to obtain peoples views. Some of these included Sunday meetings; residents/parents/carers meetings; service user questionnaires; and individual and group discussions.

We looked at the provider’s Statement of Purpose and Service User Guide which provided people who used the service and their relatives with an overview of the facilities and the aims and objectives of the service. We saw that people were also given an easy to understand contract / statement of terms and conditions. This included clear, accurate information about their rights and responsibilities.

We saw that independent advocacy support services had been used for some of the people who used the service to ensure that their needs and rights were protected. We saw that information about advocacy support was made available to relatives and people who used the service.

We looked at activity records to see what choice and access to activities people who used the service had. We saw that staff supported people to decide what activities they wanted to be involved in which showed that activities were planned in advance in consultation with the person. We saw that people were supported in promoting their mobility, independence and community involvement. We found there was a wide range of activities (both on-site at the adjacent community centre, and a range of off-site activities) in which people could engage to meet their social and development needs.

The provider told us that everyone who used the service had the choice and were supported to attend day services if they so choose. Regular events include a disco, pie and pea’s bingo night, youth club, summer fetes and Christmas parties, to mention just a few. The local community attended these which helped to promote social integration. People who used the service also attended a disco in Shirebrook each week and a youth club in Ollerton every week.

The provider told us The Oakland’s had their own mini-bus and people had regular group outings to different places of interest as well as coffee shops and days out to the coast. People who used the service also had regular one-to-one outings into the local community with their key workers, where they were supported