During an assessment under our new approach
Olivemede is a residential care service that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 32 people. At the time of our inspection, 30 older people were living at the service, including some people who were living with dementia.
This inspection was carried out to follow up on some concerns we had received about safe care delivery, management of financial procedures for money held on behalf of people living at the service and due to the length of time since our last comprehensive inspection, which was carried out in December 2020 before a transfer to dual ownership.
This was the first time we had inspected the service since the provider changed their legal entity in October 2024. The assessment started on 17 July 2026 and concluded on 18 August 2026. We gathered information from people who used the service, family members, the registered manager and care staff working at the service. We undertook a comprehensive assessment looking at all quality statements.
The provider assessed most people’s care and support needs prior to commencing with the service. We did however find that 2 peoples care records had no information or little information contained within them to guide staff. Whilst no harm had come to people, there was a potential that people would not receive the care required to ensure their health and safety needs may not be met.
Other care plans we reviewed demonstrated involvement from relevant health and social care professionals, ensuring a collaborative approach to care. These plans had not all been regularly reviewed and updated to reflect any changes in people’s needs or preferences. Families confirmed they have had input to their care plans.
Staff we spoke with knew people well. The service was visibly clean and good infection control procedures were in place. People’s independence was promoted whenever possible. Consent was sought when providing care, and best interest decisions and mental capacity assessments were in place when needed.
However, the governance at the service was not robust as the issues we found had not been identified during their own auditing processes. For example, records relating to people’s care and treatment were not always accurate or up to date to reflect people’s current needs.