Bognor care home ‘really pleased’ after CQC improvement

Oban House Residential Care Home, Bognor. Google Street View
Oban House Residential Care Home, Bognor. Google Street View

A Bognor care home said it is ‘really pleased’ after a CQC inspection recorded significant improvements in three major areas.

Oban House Residential Care Home, in Victoria Drive, Bognor, was told it ‘requires improvement’ for the fourth time in two years but, since its previous inspection on June 19, it has improved in effectiveness and response (both requires improvement up to good) as well as leadership (inadequate up to requires improvement).

It also continues to be rated ‘good’ for being caring.

However, inspectors say it still requires some improvement in safety.

The inspector said there has been ‘significant improvement across all key questions’.

Manager Diane Morris said: “We are really pleased with the report.

“We have no problems with it and didn’t contest it.

“It is fair. Hopefully we will continue to see improvements in the next inspection.”

It comes after Oban House criticised the CQC format after its previous inspection, saying that ‘it is too focused on paperwork rather than care’. Read more here

The summary of the latest inspection, undertaken on December 17, read: “Oban House was providing personal care for 19 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The home is registered for up to 30 older people living with dementia or frailty.

“The home has been rated requires improvement at the last three inspections [but] there has been significant improvement across all key questions following the last inspection and the ratings for effective, responsive and well-led have all improved at this inspection.”

The inspector identified some of the resident’s experiences of using the service.

It said: “People were safe from the risk of abuse and other identified risks relating to them. One person told us, ‘I feel safe because they give me assistance when I need it and there is always people around to help’.

“Specific risks to people had been assessed and were known by staff. Accidents and incidents were well managed and lessons had been learned to improve people’s care.

“The home was clean and people were protected from infection risks. Staffing levels met people’s needs and staff had been recruited safely.

“People received effective care from skilled, supported and knowledgeable staff. Each person was respected as an individual, with their own social and cultural diversity, values and beliefs.”

The inspector said residents received ‘kind and compassionate care’.

It added: “A relative told us, ‘we are very happy with the care. The staff do all they can and they make such an effort. They are very kind caring towards her’. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and their views listened to. A person told us, ‘staff really listen to me-really listen’.

People, staff, relatives and professionals also spoke positively of the registered manager, according to the report.

“One person told us, ‘the manager always has time for me, she is very good and cares’.”

However, there is room for improvement in regards to safety, according to the inspection.

The summary added: “The management of ‘as required’ medicines was not always safe. Guidance for staff to safely support people to take their PRN medicines was not in place and recording of PRN medicines was inconsistent. This did not provide assurance that people received these medicines safely. This is an area of practice that needs to improve.

Quality assurance systems and audits did not always identify issues in practice. Medicines audits had failed to identify issues with recording of medicines and staff not having access to information to support the safe administration of PRN medicines.”

Outlining its next steps, the summary read: “We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about this home and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule for those services rated requires improvement.”