The Care Quality Commission
  • Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

Archived: Oakwood House

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

42 Oakwood Drive, Bexleyheath, Kent, DA7 6EG

Provided and run by:
Care + Ltd

All Inspections

24 November 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Oakwood House is a rehabilitation unit for up to 9 patients with acquired brain injuries. There were seven patients at the time of our inspection. The service is run by Care + Limited as part of a rehabilitation pathway.

There was a manager in post who has applied to be the registered manager but this application had not been completed at the time of the inspection.

The service has been registered with the CQC since December 2013 to provide the following regulated activities:-

Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the 1983 Act.

Treatment of disease, disorder and injury.

This service has been inspected once before in April 2015.  The service had been issued with a warning notice and four requirement notices. The requirement notices remain in place but following this inspection, the requirements specified in the warning notice were met.

28 - 29 April 2015

During a routine inspection

We rated Oakwood House as requires improvement because:

• The service did not have safe systems in place to protect people from the risks of poor medicines management. We found examples of patients being at risk of receiving incorrect doses.

• The provider had not ensured that the capacity of patients to consent to decisions was appropriately assessed in all cases. Some patients had not had their capacity to consent to a specific decision assessed appropriately.

• Not all patients had been fully assessed.

• Not all equipment being used by the service was suitable for the purpose they were being used for.

However

• The provider had recently improved its systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services provided. However, this was not yet fully embedded.

• Staff were caring towards patients and most patients and relatives told us they felt the standard of care was good. However, some language staff used was paternalistic.

• The service had a comprehensive multi-disciplinary team. Staff from all backgrounds felt they were able to input into the development of plans for patients.