Oakley Lodge Care Home (57)

The service was supporting visits to the home inside and in the garden, as well as people being able to visit friends and family outside of the home. In-between visits people were supported to use video calls to keep in touch.

People had individual needed assessed in relation to COVID-19 and visiting and the impact of any resulting restrictions and how these would be supported.

There were systems in place to minimise the risk of COVID-19 being spread in the home. These included, asking visitors screening questions, checking results of lateral flow tests, sanitising, wearing Protective Personal Equipment (PPE) such as masks and checking the COVID-19 vaccinations status of professional visitors.

Staff were part of a regular testing regime and people, who could not tolerate testing, were checked daily for signs and symptoms of COVID-19.

There were processes in place for isolating people who were COVID-19 positive or suspected to be and this included separating laundry and mealtimes.

The service was clean and tidy and free from any mal odours. There were detailed cleaning schedules in place for day and night staff and these were signed off by staff once completed.

The service had a stock of PPE and staff confirmed they had access to plenty of PPE. There was clear signage about hand hygiene and COVIS_19 measures at the front of the house.

Staff had received training on IPC and COVID-19 and told us they felt supported by the registered manager if they needed support.

The service was supported by other health professionals such as the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and IPC nurse and local GP, should they need advice.

Oakley Lodge Care Home (57) is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care home accommodates up to three people with learning disabilities and other long-term health conditions. At the time of the inspection, two people were being supported by the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

There was a registered manager in post, but they were not available during the inspection. However, the deputy manager was available throughout 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.

People were safe because there were effective risk assessments in place, and systems to keep them safe from abuse or harm. There were safe staff recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient numbers of staff to support people safely. Staff took appropriate precautions to ensure people were protected from the risk of acquired infections. People’s medicines were managed safely, and there was evidence of learning from incidents.

People’s needs had been assessed and they had care plans that took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs effectively. The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being met, and staff understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care and support being provided. People had been supported to have enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were also supported to access healthcare services.

People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful staff. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff regularly reviewed the care provided to people with their input to ensure that this continued to meet their individual needs, in a person-centred way. The provider had an effective system to handle complaints and concerns. People were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests. The provider was still working towards recording people’s wishes about the kind of care they would like at the end of their lives.

The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive improvements. People and staff we spoke with were happy with the quality of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.