Archived: Oak Tree Manor

Updated 15 May 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 was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2014 and to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications. Statutory notifications include information about important events which the provider is required to send us. We also reviewed the provider information return (PIR) submitted to us. This is information that the provider is required to send to us, which gives us some key information about the service and tells us what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.

The inspection was unannounced and carried out by two inspectors, an assistant inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is someone who has used this type of service or supported a relative who has used this type of service.

During the inspection we spoke with 16 people who used the service, eight relatives, four staff members, the acting manager and the provider. We received information from service commissioners and health and social care professionals. We viewed information relating to four people’s care and support. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the service.

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 due to their complex health needs.

Updated 15 May 2018

This inspection was carried out on 10 April 2018 and was unannounced. At their last inspection on 8 January 2016, they were found to be meeting the standards we inspected. At this inspection we found that they had continued to meet all the standards. However, there were some areas that required improvement. This was in relation to records, systems and processes.

Oak Tree Manor is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Oak Tree Manor provides accommodation for up to 65 older people some who live with dementia. The home is not registered to provide nursing care. At the time of the inspection there were 34 people living there. The service planned on amending their registration to reflect the number of people they currently supported.

The service had a manager who was about to register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, they had not identified the areas that required improvement that we found on inspection. This was mainly in relation to records, systems and processes. People and staff were positive about the running of the home.

Accidents and incidents needed to have remedial actions taken recorded and a system for identifying themes and trends needed to be developed to ensure it was robust. Medicines were managed safely. However there were some areas for development.

People were supported in a safe way and staff knew how to recognise and report any risks to people’s safety. However, staff knowledge in relation to evacuation in the event of a fire needed to be improved. Staff were recruited safely and received regular supervision and updates to their training. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs in a timely way.

Most people were supported in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, however, documentation needed improving.

People were positive about the food. However it was not clear if people were aware there was a choice of meals. People had access to health and social care professionals as needed.

People were treated with respect and kindness. We also found that people’s privacy and dignity was promoted. People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care. Confidentiality was promoted as staff spoke discreetly about people and records were stored securely.

People received care in a person centred way however care plans required further development to ensure they accurately reflected the care provided. People enjoyed the activities provided and there was a complaint’s process which people and their relatives knew how to use.