Oakmeadow Community Support Centre

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.

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.