Oakfield House

Updated 6 January 2018

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 was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection which took place on 23 and 24 November 2017. The inspection was undertaken by one inspector.

As part of the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and looked at the notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We requested information about the home from the Healthwatch and the local authority. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care. The local authority has responsibility for funding people who used the service and monitoring its safety and quality.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make

During our inspection we spent time with people in the communal areas of the home and saw how staff supported the people they cared for. We spoke with three people who lived at the home. We have therefore not used quotes within this report and the examples we have given are brief because we respect people’s right to confidentiality. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We also spoke with four relatives as part of the inspection and two health care professionals.

The registered manager was not available on the days of the inspection so we talked with the deputy manager of the home and the provider’s representative. We talked with nine care staff members, a member of the catering staff and one cleaner. We contacted the registered manager after the inspection visit to discuss plans for developing the care people received further.

We checked a range of documents and written records. These included five people's care records, documents showing us how people’s medicines were managed, and actions undertaken to help to monitor and promote peoples safety. We saw key policies and procedures were in place, such as how people’s rights were promoted, how the staff would respond to any complaints made and how staff were encouraged to raise any concerns they had for people’s well-being. Staff training records and three staff recruitment files were also checked.

We also looked at information about how the provider and registered manager monitored the quality of the care provided and the actions they took to develop the service further. This included questionnaires completed by people’s relatives, minutes of meetings with the relatives’ group, The Friends of Oakfield House and minutes of staff meetings.

Updated 6 January 2018

Oakfield House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Oakfield House accommodates 20 people in one adapted building, with areas for people to spend time together or more privately as they choose. People have the space they need to enjoy their hobbies.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with autism, some of whom have additional learning disabilities, can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People’s care was provided by staff who took action to promote their safety and staff knew what action to take if they had any concerns for people. Staff understood people’s individual safety needs and worked with them to reduce the risks they experienced. This included when people chose to try new experiences. There was enough staff available to care for people in the ways they preferred. People were supported to manage their medicines independently where possible, or with support from staff.

Staff assessed people’s care needs and involved people who knew them, so people’s needs were promptly met when they moved into the home. People benefited from receiving care from staff with the skills and experience to meet their needs. People enjoyed their mealtime experiences and were supported to access the health services they needed to remain well. Staff supported people to use IT and sensory equipment where they liked to do this, and people had decided how they wanted their rooms to be decorated. 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 supported this practice.

People were relaxed with staff and enjoyed spending time with them. People’s communication needs were known by staff who responded in the best way to support people’s day to day choices. Staff promoted people’s dignity and independence by encouraging and supporting people to make their own choices..

People’s care had been planned by taking their individual wishes and needs into account and was regularly reviewed. Staff communicated information regularly with other staff and relatives, so people’s care would be varied to meet their changing needs. People and their relatives knew how to raise any concerns or complaints they may have and were confident these would be addressed.

Staff had been supported to understand how they were to care for people so people would enjoy a good quality of life. The provider and the registered manager checked on the quality of the care provided to people by communicating with people and their relatives and checking their care records. The registered manager listened to the views of relatives and staff when developing people’s care and the home further. This included refurbishment of people's rooms and the communal areas of the home. Senior staff had built effective working relationships with other organisations so people would benefit from trying new experiences and the best chance to access health services.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.