Oakdown House

Updated 25 December 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 14 December 2020 and was announced.

Updated 25 December 2020

About the service

Oakdown House is a residential home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 45 people. People were living with a range of learning disabilities and health issues for example, diabetes and epilepsy. The service provides living accommodation in four buildings on the same site. At the time of the inspection there were 43 people living at the home who ranged in age from 19 to 83.

The service had been developed and designed in line with most of the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People’s support focussed on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People were mostly unable to tell us whether they felt safe but we observed people and staff together and saw that people were cared for and looked after well. Staff knew and understood safeguarding and were able to tell us what they would do in various circumstances. Relatives and professionals told us the service was safe. We saw multiple risk assessments within care plans that were bespoke to people’s needs. Staff were recruited safely and there were enough on duty throughout the day and night to look after people. Medicines were stored and given safely.

New staff were provided with a comprehensive induction and ongoing support was maintained through regular supervisions and appraisals. Staff training was up to date and regular refreshers were in place and staff could chose to attend course relevant to their work. People had access to health and social care professionals and were supported to attend appointments off site. People were encouraged to be involved in food preparation and were provided with a nutritious and varied diet. Some people lived with diabetes and others required puree meals, these were prepared and provided freshly each day. Mental capacity assessments and best interest meetings had taken place when there was a recognised need. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were in place. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were treated with respect and dignity. A relative said, “It’s a beautiful home. The best thing is the love they give, there is a culture of supporting each other.” Equality and diversity needs were respected and promoted. People’s privacy was respected but safety never compromised. Everyone living at the home was encouraged to be as independent as possible, in all aspects of their lives.

We saw numerous interactions between staff and people and in every case, it was clear that staff knew people well. Person centred care was documented and practiced. A range of activities were provided seven days a week. We saw small group activities and people being given one to one support. Most people were able to go out on short trips to local shops, recreational facilities and places of worship if they chose to. A complaints policy was in place and we saw that complaints had been correctly recorded and managed in a timely and appropriate way. End of life training took place and staff knew the important aspects of care at these times.

The registered manager was well thought of by everyone we spoke with. They provided a visible presence throughout the service and it was clear that people and staff knew the registered manager well. Auditing processes were in place which were overseen by the registered manager. Opportunities for learning and capturing best practice were in place and a regular series of meetings with staff and people allowed this information to be shared. Feedback was sought from people, staff and relatives and continuous learning was apparent from the feedback. The service is set in a rural location but maintained strong links with the local community.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

Good. (Report published 12 May 2017)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.