Haywood Oaks Care Home

Updated 3 February 2022

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 the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 18 January 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.

Updated 3 February 2022

We inspected the service on 19 March 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Haywood Oaks Care Home accommodates up to 20 people over two floors. On the day of our inspection, 13 people were using the service and two people were in hospital.

At the last inspection in January 2016, the service was rated overall ‘Good’ and ‘Requires Improvement’ in ‘Responsive’. At this inspection, we found the service remained overall ‘Good’. Improvements had been made in ‘Responsive’ but ‘Safe’ had deteriorated to ‘Requires Improvement’.

A concern was identified with the stock of one medicine but people received their prescribed medicines safely. Risk assessments associated with people’s needs had not always been completed. Some records relating to people’s needs had not been stored appropriately.

The service was clean and infection control measures were in place. People were supported by sufficient staff that had been deployed appropriately, staff skill mix had been considered. Safe staff recruitment checks had been carried out when new staff commenced.

Staff received an induction and continued training and support to carry out their work. Recognised tools and best practice guidance was used when assessing people’s needs. People’s nutritional needs had been assessed and planned for. Health care needs were monitored and referrals were made to external health care professionals when needed. The premises were well maintained and were appropriate for the needs of people who used the service.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed.

People who used the service and or their relatives where appropriate, were encouraged to contribute to the planning and ongoing review of their care. People received care that respected their privacy and dignity and independence was encouraged. Staff understood people’s needs, routines and preferences. Advocacy information was available for people should they have required this support.

People received opportunities to participate in social activities and interest and hobbies were encouraged. People’s end of life wishes had been discussed with them. People felt able to raise concerns or complaints and the complaint procedure had been made available for people.

People who used the service and their relatives were encouraged to give feedback about their experience of the service. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.