Axminster care home rated ‘good’ on all fronts

The Oak House Care Home team (l to r) Rachael Smith (admin), Maria Cousins (manager), Sam Munday (c

The Oak House Care Home team (l to r) Rachael Smith (admin), Maria Cousins (manager), Sam Munday (carer), Dave Baker (owner) and Leah Head (admin). Picture: CHRIS CARSON - Credit: Archant

Oak House staff praised by inspectors for keeping residents safe and meeting their needs

An Axminster care home has been praised after an inspection by the Care Quality Commission.

Oak House, in Chard Street, has been rated ‘good’ in all key areas, including safety, caring and leadership.

Inspectors made an unannounced visit in January when the home had 17 residents - mostly frail, older people and some living with dementia.

At a previous visit in November 2016 the CQC rated the home as ‘requiring improvement’ because the provider had not ensured that people were always treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was not always maintained.


You may also want to watch:


An action plan included staff receiving supervision to discuss concerns and putting in place curtain screens in shared bedrooms.

Following the latest visit inspectors said: “We checked to see whether the requirement had been met and found it had been addressed.”

Most Read

The report continued: “People, visitors and staff gave positive feedback about the management team. They were happy to approach them if they had a concern and were confident that actions would be taken if required. The

management team and staff promoted person-centred care and a family-like atmosphere at the service. ”People were treated equally with any diverse requirements accepted and met.

“There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. People were supported by staff who had the required recruitment checks in place and were trained and had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.

“Management team and staff promoted person-centred care and a family-like atmosphere at the service. ”People were treated equally with any diverse requirements accepted and met.

“There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to keep people safe and meet their needs.”

Other strengths highlighted in the report included:

*People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff were friendly in their approach and maintained people’s privacy and dignity while undertaking tasks. * Staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet and knew people’s likes and dislikes and ensured people received their prescribed medicines on time and in a safe way.

People were supported to undertake activities.

Become a Supporter

This newspaper has been a central part of community life for many years. Our industry faces testing times, which is why we're asking for your support. Every contribution will help us continue to produce local journalism that makes a measurable difference to our community.

Become a Supporter
Comments powered by Disqus