You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 March 2020

Oasis Bradford is a drug and alcohol residential, 19 bedded detoxification service located within Bradford, West Yorkshire.

We rated Oasis Bradford as good because:

  • Staff ensured the safe running of the service. The building environment was clean, well maintained and fit for the purpose it was being used. The service had good safeguarding mechanisms in place to ensure the protection of vulnerable people. Staff ensured incidents were investigated and lessons learnt across the service.

  • The provider used interventions that were in line with best practice and national guidance. They offered their clients a range of different medical and therapeutic treatment options. Oasis Bradford employed a range of skilled staff with relevant qualifications to undertake their roles successfully. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals. Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. Staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided.

  • Staff were kind, compassionate and caring. Clients were at the centre of the care that the service offered. Clients were consulted with during times of change and their feedback was used to improve services. Clients were overwhelmingly positive about the care and treatment they received.

  • Staff were responsive to the needs of the people who use the service. They took appropriate measures to ensure clients could access the service by addressing protected characteristics such as disability and ethnicity. The service had a clear referral criteria and could treat clients in a timely manner; it also met its target for successful discharges. The service received 269 compliments in the last 12 months in comparison to 11 complaints.

  • The service was well led. The leaders were visible, knowledgeable and well established in their role. The organisation promoted an open culture where staff felt they could raise concerns without fear of reprisal. Oasis Bradford had robust, effective governance systems in place which enabled leaders to monitor performance and drive improvement.


  • We found therapy space was be limited if the service was operating at capacity. However, we were told that the service had plans to extend its provision to a neighbouring building.
Inspection areas



Updated 31 March 2020

We rated safe as good because:

  • All clinical premises where clients received care were safe, clean, well equipped, well furnished, well maintained and fit for purpose.

  • The service had enough nursing and medical staff, who knew the clients and received basic training to keep them safe from avoidable harm.

  • Staff understood how to protect clients from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse, and they knew how to apply it.

  • Staff had easy access to clinical information, and it was easy for them to maintain high quality clinical records.

  • The service used systems and processes to safely prescribe, administer, record and store medicines. Staff regularly reviewed the effects of medications on each client’s physical health.

  • The service had a good track record on safety. The service managed client safety incidents well. Staff recognised incidents and reported them appropriately. Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service. When things went wrong, staff apologised and gave clients honest information and suitable support



Updated 31 March 2020

We rated effective as good because:

  • Staff completed comprehensive assessments with clients on admission to the service. They worked with clients to develop individual care plans and updated them as needed. Care plans reflected the assessed needs, were personalised, holistic and recovery-oriented.
  • Staff provided a range of care and treatment interventions suitable for the client group and consistent with national guidance and best practice. They ensured that clients had good access to physical healthcare and supported clients to live healthier lives.
  • Staff used recognised rating scales to assess and record severity and outcomes. They also participated in clinical audit, benchmarking and quality improvement initiatives.
  • The teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of clients under their care. Managers made sure that staff had the range of skills needed to provide high quality care. They supported staff with appraisals, supervision and opportunities to update and further develop their skills. Managers provided an induction programme for new staff.
  • Staff supported clients to make decisions on their care for themselves. They understood the provider’s policy on the Mental Capacity Act 2015 and knew what to do if a client’s capacity to make decisions about their care might be impaired.



Updated 31 March 2020

We rated caring as good because[BK1]:

  • Staff treated clients with compassion and kindness. They respected patients’ privacy and dignity. They understood the individual needs of clients and supported clients to understand and manage their care and treatment.

  • Staff involved clients in care planning and risk assessment and actively sought their feedback on the quality of care provided. They ensured that clients had easy access to additional support.

  • Staff informed and involved families and carers appropriately. Carers could attend weekly groups to access support and educate themselves around substance misuse.
  • Clients and carers were really positive about the care and treatment they received.



Updated 31 March 2020

We rated responsive as good because:

  • The service was easy to access and had a clear referral criteria. Staff planned and managed discharge well. The service had alternative care pathways and referral systems for people whose needs it could not meet.

  • The design, layout, and furnishings of the ward supported clients’ treatment, privacy and dignity. Each client had their own bedroom and could keep their personal belongings safe. There were quiet areas for privacy.

  • The service met the needs of all clients, including those with a protected characteristic or with communication support needs.

  • The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results, and shared these with the whole team and the wider service.



Updated 31 March 2020

We rated well-led as good because:

  • Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles, had a good understanding of the services they managed, and were visible in the service and approachable for clients and staff.

  • Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they were applied in the work of their team.

  • Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They reported that the provider promoted equality and diversity in its day-to-day work and in providing opportunities for career progression. They felt able to raise concerns without fear of retribution.

  • Our findings from the other key questions demonstrated that governance processes operated effectively, and that performance and risk were managed well.

  • Teams had access to the information they needed to provide safe and effective care and used that information to good effect.

  • Staff collected and analysed data about outcomes and performance.

Checks on specific services

Residential substance misuse services

Updated 23 October 2017

Residential substance misuse services


Updated 31 March 2020

Start here...