Oakmeadow Community Support Centre

Updated 24 April 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector throughout the inspection and an assistant inspector for one day.

Service and service type

Oakmeadow Community support centre 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. Oakmeadow Community support centre is also registered as a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to understand the scope of the service and to ensure the registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with five relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with eleven members of staff including the registered manager. We spoke with the visiting clergy and a member of the multi-disciplinary team. These are health professionals such as GP’s, nurses, occupational health, dieticians and speech and language therapists. 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 reviewed a range of records. This included six people’s care records and medication records. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures and safety certificates.

Updated 24 April 2020

About the service

Oakmeadow community support centre is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 32 people. The home is divided into Oakmeadow on the lower floor providing intermediate care, and Hawthornes on the upper floor offering care an a period of rehabilitation. The aim of the home is to prepare and enable people to go home following discharge from hospital or to prevent people being admitted to hospital following a specific event.

Oakmeadow community support centre also is registered for personal care and this service supports people with personal care in their own homes following discharge from either hospital or from Oakmeadow.

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

At the last inspection we found that significant improvement was needed in monitoring risk, the appearance of the environment, care records, activities, staff supervision and management oversight. At this inspection we found that some improvements had been made, whilst others needed to be revisited.

On this inspection we identified breaches in regulation relating to staff training, supervision and appraisal both in the care home and the domiciliary service. Training and staff supervision were not consistent across the service. Staff told us that they had not always received appropriate training to ensure that they were equipped to fulfil their role.

People’s care and support needs were mostly reflected in their plans, however not all support plans were complete and accurate. Details about health and care plans relating to End of Life care for those people receiving support in the community and health led therapies for those people living in the care home were not always available. This was a further breach of regulation.

We also identified a breach in regulation relating to governance. Systems in place were not effective in identifying the shortfalls in the service.

People in the care home were offered a good selection of food and drink. Records relating to weight and food/fluid intake were inconsistent and did not always reflect the reason as to why they were recording the information. We have made a recommendation about this.

People supported by both services had good access to health professionals to support them with their recovery and rehabilitation.

At the last inspection the home was described as industrial and in need of decoration. The home has since been decorated, the community team offices moved from the home to more suitable locations. The home was bright, fresh and clean. The walls still lack any art work and this was discussed with the registered manager.

The registered manager has employed an activities coordinator and we saw that activities were taking place although this is in the early stages of development. we made a recommendation that the timetable for activities be re-visited to best utilise the times when people are available to participate.

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 overall supported this practice.

We observed positive warm interactions between people living at the service and staff. It was clear that staff knew people well.

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 requires improvement (published 19 December 2018). The service remains rated requires improvement. This service has been rated requires improvement for the last two consecutive inspections.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.