Rated Care Homes

Oak House

RI

Requires improvement

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 6 ratings

    First rated Requires improvement in 2015, most recently Requires improvement in January 2026.

  • 9 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 28 of 283

    rated care homes in Devon are rated Requires improvement, like this one.

Oak House: inspection record

Care home, 26 beds, Devon

Rated Requires improvement in January 2026.

Oak House: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Woodhayes (Good, 0.1 miles away) and The Lodge (Outstanding, 0.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Woodhayes Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Escan Manor No overall rating, 0.2 miles away
  3. RI
    Spring House Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
  4. O
    The Lodge Outstanding, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Dove Tree House Good, 0.5 miles away

See all care homes in Devon

See all care homes in Exeter

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 12 January 2026 (assessment visit 22 October 2025). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

Date of assessment: 5 November 2025 to 19 November 2025. The inspection was prompted, in part, due to concerns raised with us about unsafe care and treatment being provided.

  • Safe No rating
  • Effective No rating
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led Good
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Oak House is a care home registered to provide personal care for a maximum of 26 people. Some people living at the service were living with dementia. There were 22 people living at the service at the time of our assessment visit.

At our previous assessment, the service was rated as Requires Improvement. At this assessment, we found the overall rating of the service remained as Requires Improvement.

The provider had not ensured there was a fully effective governance system in place. Whilst we identified some improvements from our last assessment, we found the absence of effective governance systems and processes had not ensured all risks were identified or mitigated.

We found examples where care records had not been completed following admission, and some records were inaccurate. Some environmental issues relating to fire safety had not been identified. Areas of medicines management were not consistent and documents relating to people’s capacity to make decisions were not always completed. Whilst we found no impact to people, the absence of effective oversight by the provider and registered manager placed people at risk.

Staff understood safeguarding processes and the service management had escalated concerns where required. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs and staff were recruited safely. Infection control processes were monitored and there were systems to record accidents and incidents; however, improvements were needed to ensure learning from events was undertaken.

Staff were positive about their employment and spoke highly of the management and provider level support they received. Staff received an induction, training, supervision and appraisal to enable them to meet people’s needs. People’s needs relating to eating and drinking were monitored, but improvements were needed in the oversight of this.

People were cared for respectfully and treated as individuals. Staff communication with people was positive and relatives generally spoke highly of the service provided. There were systems and processes to ensure the service was responsive to people’s needs. We received some less positive feedback about staff communicating in their native language when in communal areas of the service. This information was communicated to the registered manager.

There was a vision for the service. The service worked well with other healthcare professionals, and the registered manager told us there were links in place with local schools and places of worship.

The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to Need for consent, Safe care and treatment, Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment and Good governance. There was also a breach relating to failing to send statutory notifications as required by law.

Whilst some improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of some of these regulations, sufficient improvements had not been made in the regulations relating to Safe care and treatment and Good governance. The provider remains in breach of these regulations.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

  1. Safe

    No rating

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

    At our last assessment, we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating has remained Requires Improvement. We identified an ongoing breach of the Safe care and treatment regulation.

    This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

  2. Effective

    No rating

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    At our last assessment, we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating has remained Requires Improvement.

    This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    At our last assessment, we rated this key question Good. At this assessment, the rating has remained Good.

    This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    At our last assessment, we rated this key question Good. At this assessment, the rating has remained Good.

    This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    Good

    Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

    At our last assessment, we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to Good.

    This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Safe was rated Requires improvement on 12 January 2026. Ask how medicines are managed, how staffing levels are decided and how incidents are reviewed.
  2. Effective was rated Requires improvement on 12 January 2026. Ask about staff training and how health appointments are arranged.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Kathleen Hodgkins
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service without nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

2 inspection reports, latest 8 June 2023. Latest assessment published 12 January 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
06674429 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Devon County Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Oak House provide nursing care?
No. The Care Quality Commission lists Oak House as a care home without nursing.
How many beds does Oak House have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 26 beds at Oak House.
When was Oak House last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Oak House was published on 12 January 2026.
Who runs Oak House?
Oak House is run by Oak House (Exeter) Ltd.
What is Oak House's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Requires improvement, published on 12 January 2026.

Contact

Phone
01392 791916
Address
56 St. Leonards Road, Exeter, EX2 4LS Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

Nearest rated Good or Outstanding: Woodhayes (Good, 0.1 miles away) and The Lodge (Outstanding, 0.3 miles away).

Nearest care homes:

  1. G
    Woodhayes Good, 0.1 miles away
  2. –
    Escan Manor No overall rating, 0.2 miles away
  3. RI
    Spring House Requires improvement, 0.2 miles away
  4. O
    The Lodge Outstanding, 0.3 miles away
  5. G
    Dove Tree House Good, 0.5 miles away

See all care homes in Devon

See all care homes in Exeter