Oaklands

Oaklands is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care to 5 people with learning disabilities, autism, and other support needs, including mental health illness. The service is registered for 6 people but can only accommodate up to 5.due facilities available.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. 'Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

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

Right Support:

Staff supported people's strengths and promoted what they could do for themselves. They understood the importance of people being as independent as possible, and the fulfilment this gave people. People were supported to be busy and to have active lives that included life activities and social events.

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's health needs were monitored, and people were supported to ensure they received health care when needed. People received their medicines in line with prescription guidelines.

Right Care:

People received kind and compassionate care. A relative said, “He flourishes at Oaklands I know he is safe I think it is just wonderful.” Another said, “I think the care staff are great they are very kind and caring.” Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity. People’s rooms were respected as people’s own space and the house was seen as their home.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs and wishes. Emphasis had been placed on ensuring that staff had the skills, knowledge, and experience to meet people's needs. Training had included specific courses on learning disability and autism. Staff knew people well and responded to all their individual needs. They understood what triggered people's anxiety and how to support them during times of distress.

Each person had a key worker who they had formed positive and supportive relationships with. Choices were provided to people in relation to their day-to-day support and how they wanted to spend their time. Recreational and social events were an important part of people's lives and given a high priority.

Right Culture:

The registered manager had established a positive and inclusive environment where people and staff felt valued and listened to. They and the staff team demonstrated a commitment to the values of the service that put people at the centre of all care and support provided.

People's relatives felt that there was good communication, and they were kept informed and could contact the service if they had anything they wanted to discuss.

Staff spoke positively about the management team, and the support they received. One staff member said, "I am very well supported by the management they are very good. They have also supported my development, including further vocational training.”

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 15 December 2016).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question.

We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service remains good.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

On the day of our inspection there was a registered manager in place. 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.

The risk to people’s safety was reduced because staff had attended safeguarding adults training, could identify the different types of abuse, and knew the procedure for reporting concerns. Risk assessments had been completed in areas where people’s safety could be at risk. People had the freedom to live their lives as they wanted to. Staff were recruited in a safe way and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to keep them safe.

Accidents and incidents were investigated. Assessments of the risks associated with the environment which people lived were carried out and people had personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) in place. Safe procedures for the management of people’s medicines were in place.

People were supported by staff who received an induction, were well trained and received regular assessments of their work. People felt staff understood how to support them effectively.

The registered manager ensured the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) had been applied when decisions had been made for people. The registered manager was aware of the requirements to apply for and implement Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards where required.

People were encouraged to lead a healthy and balanced lifestyle. This also included, where appropriate, people buying and cooking their own food. People’s day to day health needs were met by the staff and external professionals. Referrals to relevant health services were made where needed.

People had an excellent relationship with the staff. People were supported by staff who were very kind and caring and treated them with respect and dignity. People were encouraged to lead independent lives and care and support was tailored to enable people to do so. Innovative methods were used to communicate with people and there were individualised processes in place to help people understand and to contribute to, decisions about the care. There was a high emphasis on person centred care and staff were aware of the importance of encouraging people to lead their lives in the way they wanted.

People were provided with the information they needed if they wished to speak with an independent advocate, to support them with decisions about their care. People’s friends and relatives were able to visit whenever they wanted to and agreed processes were in place to support people with visiting their relatives.

People’s support records had a strong, person centred approach, where people were empowered to achieve their goals and ambitions. People’s care and support needs were regularly discussed with them and progress on achieving their goals was regularly discussed and reviewed. People were encouraged to take part in activities that were important to them and staff provided as much or as little support as people wanted. People were provided with the information they needed, in a format they could understand, if they wished to make a complaint.

People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager; they found him approachable and supportive. The registered manager ensured all people received high quality and person centred care. The registered manager understood their responsibilities and ensured people, relatives and staff felt able to contribute to the development of the service. Staff were encouraged to develop their roles and the registered manager delegated responsibilities to support them with doing so. People who used the service were encouraged to provide their feedback on how the service could be improved. There were a number of quality assurance processes in place that regularly assessed the quality and effectiveness of the support provided, which included regular review and input from a representative of the provider.

We saw that the provider had systems in place to obtain consent from people in relation to people's care and support.

People received care that met their needs and promoted their rights. Advice and guidance was sought from health and social care professionals to be able to meet people's needs effectively and promote their welfare and safety.

Staff were supported to undertake their roles safely and effectively. They received relevant training, regular supervision and were encouraged to undertake further professional development. One staff member told us the manager was approachable and another staff member told us that 'It is a small team but we do help each other'.

There was a system in place to manage compliments and complaints and complaints had been responded to appropriately.

One person told us "The staff are ok " and that "Sometimes I go by myself to get a paper".

People told us they were happy with their rooms and had chosen colour schemes themselves. One person said "I chose the colours as soon as I walked in".

People said they made choices about their daily lives. For example, about what to eat and what to do each day and that they were involved in the running of the home. They said there were house meetings that they attended and they contributed to menu planning. A person told us "There is a menu meeting tomorrow ".

People were supported to be as independent as they could. They were consulted about how they preferred to be supported and what they wished to achieved. Each person had a personalised care plan and had been involved in preparing and reviewing the information in them.

People were supported to keep in contact with their relatives and with health and social care professionals. The service made sure that people attended routine medical appointments and took action if there were any concerns about a person's health.

People were asked for their views about the home and any concerns were acted upon.