Oak Field

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 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 and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care and support plans were detailed, individualised, and regularly reviewed with people, families, advocates, and professionals to ensure they accurately reflected people’s preferences, aspirations, and changing needs. Plans included clear guidance on how staff should support people in a way that respected their choices and promoted independence.

Relatives praised the provider’s approach to person-centred planning. One relative told us,
“The service takes a very active approach to ensuring residents enjoy outings locally and further afield, including holidays.”

The provider placed a strong emphasis on promoting people’s quality of life. People were supported to take part in a wide range of meaningful activities and encouraged to participate in community events, leisure opportunities, and holidays.

This person-centred approach enabled people to pursue their goals, develop their interests, and experience a more enriched and fulfilling life.

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.

Each person had an allocated keyworker who coordinated their care and acted as the main point of contact for families, advocates, and external professionals. This helped ensure people’s needs were understood clearly, and information was shared promptly between everyone involved in their care.

Keyworkers supported people by monitoring progress against personal goals, updating care plans in response to changes, and liaising with professionals such as GPs, psychiatrists, and social workers to ensure care remained safe and effective.

Relatives told us they valued the consistency provided by having a regular keyworker, which made communication easier and helped them feel involved and reassured about their loved one’s care.

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

People were supported using a range of accessible communication tools to help them understand decisions about their care and daily life. Staff used visual prompts, social stories, objects of reference, and simplified communication formats tailored to each person’s individual needs.

These approaches helped people make informed choices about their routines, activities, and personal care. For example, social stories were used to prepare people for upcoming appointments, new experiences, and changes in routines, reducing anxiety and improving confidence.

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

People and relatives were actively involved in care reviews, planning, and decision-making. Relatives told us they were generally kept informed about incidents, changes, and updates to care plans and felt their views were respected.

Feedback from relatives was mostly positive. One relative said, “We’re generally happy as a family. We have no problems and are happy with the manager. Things are consistent, and having a regular keyworker makes communication easier.”

However, some relatives expressed that communication could be improved further, particularly regarding timely updates after incidents or significant changes in care. The provider acknowledged this feedback and told us they were working to strengthen their approach to information sharing and family engagement.

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

People had equal access to healthcare, activities, and cultural or religious support based on their needs, preferences, and personal choices. Staff worked flexibly to ensure people could participate in opportunities that were meaningful to them and reflected their individual values and beliefs.

For example, one person was supported to attend church services regularly, with staff helping them arrange transport, plan their visits, and take part in community worship.

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.

Staff supported people to participate in a wide range of meaningful activities tailored to their interests, preferences, and abilities. These included baking, arts and crafts, community outings, and personal development opportunities, ensuring that everyone had equal access to enriching experiences regardless of their level of support needs.

As part of the summer activities programme, we saw evidence of a recent beach trip organised by the service. People told us they had enjoyed the day, and photographs showed them taking part in outdoor games, group activities, and relaxation by the sea. Feedback from staff and relatives confirmed that these opportunities promoted social inclusion, confidence, and emotional wellbeing.

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.

People’s future aspirations and personal goals were discussed during care reviews, and care plans included clear steps to support people in achieving them. Where appropriate, advocates and professionals were involved to ensure people’s wishes were fully understood and respected.

For some people, conversations had taken place about their end-of-life care preferences, and these were documented within care plans where decisions had been made. For others, these discussions had not yet been fully explored; however, the provider had taken a sensitive and proactive approach by engaging families, advocates, and professionals to facilitate these conversations at a pace comfortable for the individual.