• Care Home
  • Care home

Oak Hill Mansion

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Oak Hill Mansion, Oak Hill Park, Manchester Road, Accrington, BB5 2BN

Provided and run by:
Appmedical Limited

Assessment report published 18 July 2025

On this page

Responsive

Good

23 June 2025

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

Person-centred Care

Score: 3

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 was extremely person centred. People told us how their views on different matters were regularly sought, and their personal preferences were respected.

Care plans and daily care notes were written respectfully.

Care provision, Integration and continuity

Score: 3

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.

Support was flexible and tailored, and where appropriate support levels could be increased or reduced.
Staff rotas were managed so that care was consistent and continuous, but also changes could be made when needed. The provider understood what was available in the local community and had links with different organisations locally to promote the service.

Providing Information

Score: 3

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

Information about the service was available in different formats and could be adapted. People’s communication needs were accounted for in their care plans. Staff had built up good knowledge about people and could communicate with them according to their needs.

Listening to and involving people

Score: 3

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.

There was an appropriate complaints policy although no formal complaints had been received. The manager responded to informal issues and concerns effectively and in a timely way. The provider organised events for people to provide feedback and planned to send out surveys. A relative told us, “The recent residents and family meeting was well attended, and I feel we were listened to with what we had to say; they are definitely responsive.” We saw several thank you cards from people and relatives displayed in the corridors.

Equity in access

Score: 3

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

The service was accessible at the time when people needed it most. For example, the provider supported a late-night admission as the person involved had a strong wish to leave hospital as soon as possible. Staff were able to meet people’s needs in a responsive and timely manner. The provider had different ways to link in with the local community so that people knew about the service and how it could help them.

Equity in experiences and outcomes

Score: 3

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.

The provider and manager were aware of inequalities that could affect people’s outcomes and tried to make sure this was addressed.

Planning for the future

Score: 3

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 manager conducted appropriate assessments and talked to people about their preferences about their future care. End of life care planning was evident in care plans. Staff said they completed end of life training, and some staff had specialist knowledge. There was no one who was at the end of their life at the time of the assessment, although medication was in place for 1 person should it be needed.