Oak House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

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

At our last assessment, we rated this key question Good. At this assessment, the rating has remained Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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 plans contained sufficient detail to enable staff to provide person led care. This meant people would receive care that met their individual needs and preferences. For example, people’s care plans included important information of their life experiences, work history, family life, hobbies and interests or their culture and beliefs. People and relatives gave mixed feedback on their level of involvement in creating care plans, which we fed back to the registered manager.

People and their relatives gave mixed feedback about care being fully person-centred. Some told us they felt staff did things on their behalf and were not always pro-active in promoting the independence that comes from person-led care interventions.

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.

We saw referrals had been made to other healthcare professionals to support people with their identified needs. People benefited from a regular, stable staff team who knew them well. This help ensure people received continuity in their care. People’s relatives told us staff had made referrals to health and social care professionals when required.Health professionals we spoke with, did not raise any concerns around untimely referrals.

The provider had a process in place to ensure continuity of care, for example, if a person was admitted into hospital the relevant information could go with them via the care planning system.

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

People’s care records included information about how they communicated and guidance for staff in how to effectively communicate with people. Where required, important information such as the complaints procedure and published guidance on visiting care homes safely were provided in accessible formats, such as easy read. Notice boards included information about previous activities.

The provider understood their duties under the Accessible Information Standard (AIS) and made sure alternative communication formats were available, when required. We saw examples of photos being used to support people making meal choices.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result.

The provider had a complaints policy in place. The registered manager told us no formal complaints had been received recently, however prior to the assessment we had received information of concern from a person’s relative. Whilst CQC were aware the provider had engaged with the relative, this had not been formally recorded or documented, which is a requirement under the relevant regulation.

The registered manager told us there were meetings held for people and their relatives to allow them to keep up to date with changes in the service and to feedback information personal to them.

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

The registered manager told us they had positive relationships and worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people had access to services to receive the care they required. This was confirmed by people’s records which included support and guidance provided by external professionals who were involved in people’s care.

People were supported to maintain relationships with those who were important to them. We saw family and friends of people were able to visit when they wished and were made welcome by the staff team.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People’s care records included information about their history and diverse needs and how they were met. People’s preferences were documented regarding the care and support they received, including information from their relatives, where appropriate. The staff supported people to access services where required.

Care staff had completed diversity, equality and inclusion training. Staff were aware of the importance of ensuring people were not subject to inequality or discrimination. Staff, people and their relatives did not identify any concerns to us about discrimination or inequity in care and treatment outcomes.

People were not always 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.

Treatment Escalation Plans (TEPs) were in place for people living at the service; however, this was not consistent in relation to advanced care plans. We identified there were 13 advanced care plans in place which were very detailed, however these had been completed by external health professionals in 2024 and not the service. No further advanced care plans had been completed since 2024 that would help to ensure the service would meet people’s needs in their last days of life.

We spoke with the registered manager about end-of-life care. They explained when someone was at the end of their life, they ensured they were present for both people and their families. A relative recently sent a thank you card to the service which read, ‘Thank you for all your patience and personal kindness to our dad and us. Keeping him at Oak House was important to us and you fought for him, I know.'