Archived: Oulton Manor

Updated 5 July 2017

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place over two days on 25 and 26 April 2017 and was unannounced on the first day. This meant the registered provider and staff did not know we would be visiting. At the time of our inspection there were 76 people using the service.

Before the inspection we checked the information we held about the registered provider, including people’s feedback and notifications of significant events affecting the service. We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the registered provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and what improvements they plan to make.

As part the of our pre inspection process we contacted the local Health watch and local authority safeguarding and contracting teams to obtain their views about the service. Health watch is an independent consumer group that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

During our inspection we observed how staff interacted with people and their relatives. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) in the communal areas of the service. SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experiences of people who cannot speak with us.

We spoke with six people who used the service, six visiting relatives, three members of care staff, two senior care staff, a member of ancillary staff, the catering manager, the maintenance manager, an activities/life style coordinator, a peripatetic nurse manager, the deputy manager, the registered manager and an operations manager who was making a regular visit to the service. We also spoke with two health professionals who were attending the service and subsequently spoke with a dementia advocate and campaigner in the local community with whom the service had developed close links.

We looked at five care files belonging to people who used the service, four staff records and a selection of documentation relating to the management and running of the service. This included staff training files and information about staff rotas, meeting minutes, incident reports, recruitment information and quality assurance audits. We also undertook a tour of the premises.

Updated 5 July 2017

Oulton Manor provides residential accommodation and personal care for up to 77 older people, including people living with dementia. The service was registered in April 2016. Accommodation, care and support is provided in a modern, purpose built building, over three floors. At the time of our inspection there were 76 people using the service.

This comprehensive inspection took place over two days on 25 and 26 April 2017 and was unannounced on the first day. This meant the registered provider and staff did not know we would be visiting. This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

There was a registered manager for the service. 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.

Staff had been recruited safely and they received training to ensure they knew how to recognise and report potential abuse. Risks to people were identified and plans put in place to help manage and minimise these from occurring. People lived in a safe, clean, well maintained environment and equipment was regularly checked. Medicines were managed safely and checks were carried out to ensure staff were competent to administer these. Sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people’s needs.

Staff were provided with a range of training and development opportunities to enable them to effectively support people's needs. People were assisted to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff assisted them in the least restrictive way possible; policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People’s care plans reflected their preferences and needs and these were updated and regularly reviewed. The nutritional needs of people were appropriately maintained and they were able to make choices about these. People's medical needs were monitored and support and guidance was appropriately sought from a range of health care professionals.

People were included in discussions and decisions and about their care and support. Staff worked together well as a team and people were supported in a kind and compassionate manner to ensure their dignity was respected and their independence promoted.

People received their support in an individualised way that was personalised to meet their needs. People were positive about the care and support they received. People were provided with an extensive range of activities and they were encouraged to take part in opportunities for them to have meaningful social interaction. People’s comments and complaints were responded to appropriately. People were consulted and their opinions and their views considered enabling the service to learn and develop.

There was an open and inclusive ethos in the service and people, their relatives and staff were positive about the way it was run. Systems were in place to ensure the quality of service delivered to people was assessed and monitored to help it to continually improve.