Oakview Care Home

People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw good interactions and found that people were usually treated with dignity and respect.

“The staff are brilliant, they are very friendly and caring.” from the report

Inspectors found there were enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks, including criminal record checks, had been completed.

“Processes in place ensured people were supported by suitable staff. A number of pre-employment background checks had been completed.” from the report

Relevant healthcare professionals were involved in people's care. Relatives gave positive feedback about staff responding to health concerns.

“Recently [Name of Person] had a chest infection and the carer was worried. The carer called the GP out straightaway and later the same day [Person] had their antibiotics.” from the report

The home had systems for recording complaints and actions taken. Residents' meetings and other feedback helped identify issues for action.

“There are minutes and they do action the points.” from the report

Care plans and risk assessments contained conflicting or missing information. Fire risks linked to smoking, oxygen and flammable medicines were not always properly assessed, and staff did not always follow the required precautions.

“Management of risk was not always effective, placing people at increased risk of harm.” from the report

Mental capacity assessments were not always completed or reviewed. The home did not have a reliable system for following up deprivation of liberty applications.

“We found the service was not working within the principles of the MCA.” from the report

Audits failed to identify problems with risk records, care plan updates and as-needed medicine guidance. This meant the provider did not consistently find and correct important shortfalls.

“Systems were not always robust enough to demonstrate effective monitoring of the quality of the service.” from the report

The quality of mealtime support and activities varied between the four units. On some units, people had limited interaction beyond care tasks, and staff did not always respond appropriately when one person became distressed.

“However, this was not reflected on all units. For example, multiple people were supported in their bedrooms and interaction was limited to care tasks.” from the report

Inspectors saw a urine sample taken from a person's catheter bag in a communal lounge while other people were present.

“Staff had not considered the person's dignity on this occasion.” from the report