Oakdene Rest Home

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and staff understood how to provide person-centred care.

A staff member told us about a person they support. They said, “One resident…we know when [they are] having a bad day and cannot [do things independently] versus [when they] need encouragement and [are] able to do it.” We observed staff supporting people with an understanding of their backgrounds, life histories and engaging in their memories. Support was offered in ways that suited people, giving choice even when staff knew the answer.

People and relatives felt the staff provided person-centred care. A person said, “I can choose what I want to do.” A relative said, “[Staff are] lovely, absolutely lovely. They know [us] by name. They pop in to see [Person’s name] and have a joke. Doesn’t matter if it is the lady from kitchen, cleaners or carers they are all very friendly… They know what [person] likes.” A professional also commented, “They (staff) know their residents very well."

The provider did not always understand some of the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was not always joined up, and systems were not always operated effectively to support staff to deliver continuity in people’s care.

People’s care records did not always contain personalised and detailed guidance for staff to follow to ensure all staff provided consistent risk management and monitoring strategies. This also meant newer staff might not be able to deliver care in line with people’s preferences. Staff felt they had received the training they needed to carry out their roles although some people had specific conditions or needs which the staff team had not had recent additional training for. Additional training helps staff to keep their knowledge and skills up to date and better enables staff to provide consistent support. The provider ensured staff completed relevant training following the inspection.

However, there was an established staff team at the service who were knowledgeable about people, their conditions and their preferences. A relative said, “[Registered Manager] tends to keep the staff, a lot have been there for quite a while. I think from what I have seen they are pretty good…they know [Person] well which makes a difference."

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

People told us staff shared information clearly and in ways they understood. A person said, “They will let me know what is going on and will come and get me.” We observed staff supporting a person to mobilise, staff spoke clearly and gave simple instructions to help the person with movement. When the person was not able to complete the movement safely, staff paused to give the person time, used gentle and reassuring touch, and re-explained the movement to the person. The person was then able to complete the movement safely.

Relatives confirmed they were kept informed and were involved in planning people’s care. A relative said, “I can ring any time or [Registered Manager] emails, and the contact is very good."

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas about their care, treatment and support. People and relatives told us that they received surveys and could attend meetings where they were able to share feedback. Changes such as more activities were introduced following feedback. Information about the management of the service was also shared with people and relatives during meetings.

People felt listened to and able to raise concerns. One person said, “Very good and if they can’t answer my concerns, they will get someone who can.” Relatives echoed this, a relative told us, “Only thing I raised were clothes appearing in the wardrobe and none had names in. I raised it to say can anything be done. There haven’t been any more things in there that aren’t [person’s names].” The provider confirmed they had provided labelling to prevent this happening again. Another relative said, “I did have a problem with the flooring once, the flooring was a bit sticky. [Registered Manager] said we will get it changed and 2-3 days later it was changed for new flooring."

People told us they had access to what they needed. A person said, “I’m sure I have everything I need.” Relatives supported this, “[Person] has everything [they] need.” Another relative gave an example of how staff had supported their relative to have better access in their home. They said, “[Person] has [their] mobility equipment in [their] room now. [Staff] have moved [Person’s name’s] room around, they changed the position of the bed and got rid of an armchair and got a new one.”

Staff worked with professionals to ensure equal access to services, and advocacy was provided where needed. A relative said, “We have had the optician in to see [Person]…[They] have everything [they] need.” A professional told us, “They advocate for the clients if they have no next of kin or Power of Attorney."

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

People’s protected characteristics were considered during their assessments and documented in their care records.

Staff understood the different ways people communicated, they looked and listened to ensure people were heard and demonstrated empathy. A staff member said, “With dementia, some people might have difficulty to communicate, we take time, get down to their level and give time. If you walked away people would get frustrated.”

People had access to equipment they needed to support them to mobilise around their home. There was an activities team in the home who tailored activities to meet people’s needs and interests. Staff respected the preferences of people when they did not wish to join activities or preferred to spend time in their room.

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.

The service was not supporting anyone with care at the end of their life at the time of the assessment. However, the service had received compliments on previous end of life care provided. One read, ‘[Person] had the best possible care…In [person’s] last few days I could not have asked for more, [we] were made comfortable and looked after. It made [person’s] passing so much more bearable.’

Staff told us they encourage discussions about future care needs when appropriate. A relative said, “They always ask you about that, in the past they asked and it’s just something you deal with when it happens.” Some people said they had not discussed future plans, while others confirmed family involvement. A person said, “My family help me to make any plans.”

The service recorded important information about people’s end of life wishes such as people’s Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) status.