We carried out a review of the data available to us about Oaklands Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Oaklands Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The home was clean and well maintained and domestic staff were visible around the home.
Cleaning records were completed by domestic staff. The registered manager assured us they would increase monitoring measures to ensure when other staff were covering domestic shifts, they were always completing the required documents to demonstrate cleaning tasks had been completed. Rota’s showed domestic staff, or additional cover, were always on duty to ensure cleaning tasks were completed.
The registered manager reviewed and consolidated information within people’s risk assessments to create a single comprehensive COVID-19 risk assessment for people living at the service.
The home had the facilities to effectively cohort people in the event of an outbreak and had considered how they could ensure this had minimal impact on people with dementia.
Staff were up to date on mandatory infection, prevention and control (IPC) training and we observed good IPC practice by staff during inspection.
Staff participated in the testing and vaccination programme.
People using the service were supported to receive regular visits from relatives.
During the visit we noticed that the flooring in one of the upstairs bathroom was in urgent need of replacement due to water damage. The provider assured us there were plans in place for new flooring and contractors had already been appointed, however, due to recent infection outbreak the work had been postponed.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ Visitors were prevented from catching and spreading the infection. Visitors were screened for symptoms of the infection and had their temperature taken upon arrival at the home. Visitors were provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) such as face masks, apron and gloves.
¿ People were supported to maintain contact with their relatives by regular telephone and videocalls. The provider sent letters and used a private social media page to keep relatives up-to-date about any changes affecting the service.
¿ People and staff were encouraged to take part in the ‘whole home testing’ for COVID-19. People who lacked capacity to agree to the test had best interest decisions in place. This was consulted and agreed with their relatives.
¿ People were assessed daily for the development of high temperature and other symptoms which would indicate the infection. Staff were trained and knew how to immediately instigate full infection control measures to care for people with symptoms to avoid the infection from spreading to other residents and staff members.
¿ Shielding and social distancing rules were complied with. People who tested positive for COVID-19 were temporarily moved to one area of the home to prevent the infection from spreading. The furniture in communal areas were re-arranged to allow social distancing measures.
¿ Staff were observed wearing PPE in line with the national guidance which included face masks, gloves and aprons. Staff had their PPE donning and doffing competencies assessed by the provider.
¿ Cleaning schedules were in place and included regular cleaning of high touch points such as handrails, light switches and door handles.
We were assured this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
At our last inspection on 21 June 2016, there was no registered manger in post and the service was found to require improvement relating to staffing levels and how people were consulted regarding their choices and preferences. At this inspection we found the necessary improvements had been made.
A registered manager was in post and present on the day of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
There were policies and procedures in place to assist staff on how keep people safe. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs; staff told us they had completed training in safe working practices. We saw people were supported with patience, consideration and kindness and their privacy and dignity was respected.
People received care and support from staff who were appropriately trained and confident to meet their individual needs and they were able to access health, social and medical care, as required. There were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, such as diabetes management and the care of people with dementia. Staff received one-to-one supervision meetings with their line manager. Formal personal development plans, such as annual appraisals, were in place.
People’s needs were assessed and their care plans provided staff with clear guidance about how they wanted their individual needs met. Care plans were person centred and contained appropriate risk assessments. They were regularly reviewed and amended as necessary to ensure they reflected people’s changing support needs.
Thorough recruitment procedures were followed and appropriate pre-employment checks had been made including evidence of identity and satisfactory written references. Appropriate checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector.
Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance by staff who had received appropriate training to help ensure safe practice. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.
People were being supported to make decisions in their best interests. The registered manager and staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People’s nutritional needs were assessed and records were accurately maintained to ensure people were protected from risks associated with eating and drinking. Where risks to people had been identified, these had been appropriately monitored and referrals made to relevant professionals, where necessary.
The service was clean, well maintained and readily accessible throughout. There were quality assurance audits and a formal complaints process in place. People were encouraged and supported to express their views about their care and staff were responsive to their comments.