Oak Springs Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We assessed 5 quality statements in the safe key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. Staff provided safe care and treatment and took the necessary action to minimise any risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing. The provider has established processes in place to protect people. Staff had undergone safeguarding training and we found safeguarding concerns were investigated promptly and shared appropriately with external agencies using local safeguarding procedures. The provider demonstrated a good working knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were involved in decisions about their care and their human and legal rights were upheld. People's care records showed risks were regularly reviewed and monitored. Staff had a good knowledge of people's individual risks and could describe how to care for people safely. Staff were recruited safely and deployed in sufficient numbers to meet people's needs. Staff completed an induction programme to help them embed into their roles with confidence. Effective processes were in place to help manage the control and prevention of infection. Staff had access to up to date policies and records showed they had received training in how to reduce the risk of infection spread. Processes were in place to ensure medicines were managed safely and in line with good practice standards. Medicines were stored safely and staff kept records of medicines administration in an electronic format. Staff discussed in detail the training they had undergone to support safe medicines practices.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People told us they felt safe living at Oak Springs Care Home and were protected from the risk of harm, neglect and abuse. Comments included, "Oh yes it’s very safe here" and "Yes I do feel safe here, more so than at home." Relatives felt their loved ones were safe at the home. Comments included, "I do feel my mother is safe here" and "We do feel [Name] is safe here as best as we can."

Staff were able to explain the correct procedure for reporting and acting on abuse. They told us they monitored for any signs and symptoms of abuse and described how they would escalate their concerns. A staff member told us, "I would report it straight away. Any signs and symptoms to look out for would be physical signs such as bruising or marks, or if the person has become really withdrawn." Staff told us they had undergone training in how to effectively safeguard people and their responsibilities in this area was often a topic discussed in team meetings. A staff member told us, "There is a policy we follow, and we have all had training in safeguarding so we know the correct action to take. I always make sure new staff know the process."

We observed staff delivering safe care and treatment and taking action to minimise risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing. We observed staff spending time with people and offering them space if they became anxious or upset. We found safeguarding information displayed in the communal areas of the home which informed staff and people who to speak with if they had any concerns.

The provider had established processes to protect people. There was a strong approach to safety and a focus on openness and transparency. Safeguarding concerns were investigated promptly and shared appropriately with external agencies using local safeguarding procedures. Procedures were in place to ensure people were involved in decisions about their care and that their human and legal rights were upheld. The provider demonstrated a good working knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Records demonstrated people's capacity to make decisions about their care was assessed and, for people who lacked capacity, we found decisions were made in people's best interests. We saw DoLS applications were made appropriately and in consideration of people's needs and preferences. DoLS are a legal process to protect people who lack capacity and are deprived of their liberty in care homes.

People told us they felt safe and that risks to their safety were assessed and managed in a safe and supportive way. A person told us, "I wanted to come here and I do feel safe." Relatives confirmed risk was managed proactively. A relative commented, "I feel mum is safe here, I asked if mum could be referred to the falls team as she was having a couple of witnessed and unwitnessed falls, they have sent it I believe.”

Staff had a good knowledge of people's individual risks and could describe how to care for people safely. Staff told us they had hand held devices which contained information to guide them on how to manage risk and spoke positively about the information held in people's individual risk assessments. A staff member told us, "I spend time going through the risk assessments to make sure they are up to date."

We observed staff helping people to mobilise around the home safely. For example people were supported by staff to sit out safely on the sun terrace. Staff made sure walkways were clear and any potential trip hazards were removed. Through our observations, it was clear people were supported by staff who understood their risks and preferences. For example, at lunch time, staff ensured people were sitting comfortably and they had their food served to the correct texture and consistency.

The provider had effective processes in place to proactively identify and manage risk. People's care records showed they were supported to retain as much independence as possible, with the least restrictive option always being considered. People's care records showed risks were regularly reviewed and monitored so that the service had an accurate picture of safety at any one time. There was an open culture of learning from any safety incidents and processes allowed for regular reviews of any safety related themes and trends. The provider took action to reduce any risks and worked with other organisations to do so when needed.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We received mixed feedback from people in relation to staffing levels. Whilst people told us staff met their needs, some people told us staff were often busy which meant sometimes they had to wait for assistance. Comments from people included, "They [staff] come when you need them", " They could do with more staff at certain times, they are busy and it can take a while before they come to you when you call them" and "They are sometimes slow to come, they will come but they are so busy."

Staff spoke positively about the staffing levels in the home, they felt there were enough of them on duty to be able to support people safely and effectively. A staff member told us, "We have time to sit and chat with people." Another staff member said, "Some days are better than others, but we always get time to chat to people."

Our observations found there were enough staff deployed to support people safely. We observed call bells were being answered promptly and found people did not experience long waits for care and support. We observed many pleasant interactions between people and staff and found they were engaged frequently in conversations.

Staff rotas showed appropriate staff numbers for each suite of the home. We identified any gaps in the rota were filled by agency staff but found the registered manager took care to use only agency staff who were familiar with the home and the people who lived there. A staff dependency tool was used by the registered manager to ensure there was enough staff on duty with the right skill mix. Records showed staff were recruited safely. The provider had systems in place to ensure staff had the right skills and qualifications to carry out their roles. Staff completed an induction programme to help them embed into their roles with confidence. Supervisions and appraisals were used to develop and review staff practice to ensure personalised and high-quality care was provided to people.

During our conversations with people and their relatives, no concerns were raised regarding the cleanliness of the home. A person told us, "There are no smells here."

Staff told us the home was well maintained and the team worked hard to ensure the environment was always clean and tidy. A staff member said "I feel like as a staff team we do a really good job." Staff told us they had completed infection prevention and control training to ensure they had the underpinning knowledge to minimise the risk of infection spread. Staff described how there was always a plentiful supply of PPE for them to use.

Overall, we observed people to be living in a clean, hygienic and well-maintained environment. We identified some minor shortfalls such as bins with missing lids. However, we shared the information with the registered manager who took immediate action to address the issue. Staff wore appropriate PPE when supporting people with their meals and personal care. Our observations found there was enough PPE available for staff use.

Effective processes were in place to help manage the control and prevention of infection. Staff had access to up to date policies and records showed they had received training in how to reduce the risk of infection spread. The provider employed domestic staff and processes were in place to ensure they followed good practice to maintain the cleanliness of the home. The was a process in place to ensure people's rooms were cleaned daily and systems were established to ensure staff had access to adequate supplies of cleaning products and equipment.

We did not collect the evidence from people and relatives to score the people's experience evidence category relating to medicines optimisation. However, our observations found no concerns regarding the support people received with their medicines.

Staff described the practices they followed to ensure the safe and effective management of medicines. Staff discussed in detail the training they had undergone to support safe medicines practices. Staff told us the registered manager assesses their competency to manage medicines on an ongoing basis and described how they were observed administering medicines. A daily meeting took place and the senior members of staff who had responsibility for managing medicines kept the registered manager up to date on any issues so they could be addressed in a timely manner.

Processes were in place to help ensure medicines were managed safely and in line with good practice standards. For people who were prescribed controlled drugs (medicines which require additional regulation due to their potential to be addictive or harmful), processes were in place to ensure they were managed safely and in line with legislation. Medicines were stored safely and staff kept records of medicines administration in an electronic format. For a person, who required medicines to be given at specific times of the day to manage their health condition safely, we saw this was managed well in line with the person's needs and preferences. People were supported to manage their medicines safely and as prescribed. Wherever possible, the service recognised and facilitated when people may be able to manage their own medicines. People who were prescribed as and when required [PRN] medicines, their care records contained protocols to help guide staff as to when these medicines should be given.