This comprehensive inspection took place on 7 and 9 August 2018. The first day of the inspection was unannounced and we advised the manager of our plan to return on the second day. Oakdene Care Home is a privately owned care home with nursing. It offers accommodation and care for up to 32 people in a detached property in Oldham.

This was the first rated inspection of this service under a new provider that was registered in January 2018. The inspection had been brought forward prompted by concerns relating to a specific incident. This incident was subject to an investigation and as a result this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident.

This service is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and/or nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Risk assessments relating to the health, safety and welfare of people using services were incomplete or incorrect. You can see what action we asked the provider to take at the back of this report.

There was a lack of security to the laundry building which meant that people could access an area that could put their safety at risk. We recommended that the service review the security of this area as a matter of urgency.

Relatives were exceptionally positive about the support their loved ones received and told us about the pleasant atmosphere at the home.

People who used the service told us they felt safe. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns. We saw that recruitment procedures were sufficiently robust to help ensure that people were protected from the risk of unsuitable staff being recruited.

The administration of medicines was safe. Nursing staff administered medicines and had up to date policies and procedures to follow.

People were supported by a stable staff team who were knowledgeable and well trained. They had worked together for a number of years and knew the people who used the service well. People told us there were enough staff on duty. We saw that the staffing ratio reflected the needs of the residents.

The staff we spoke with had a good understanding of people's individual needs and the support they required.

Systems were in place to ensure that people at the end of life received appropriate care in accordance with their wishes, and were supported with the relevant healthcare as needed.

The home was clean and tidy. The environment was maintained to a good standard and was homely in character.

Electrical and gas appliances were serviced regularly. Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) and there was a business plan for any unforeseen emergencies.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control and provided with appropriate equipment and handwashing facilities. This helped to protect the health and welfare of staff, people who used the service and visitors.

Staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities of how to apply any best interest decisions under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and followed the correct procedures using independent professionals.

People told us the manager was approachable and would listen and respond to any issues raised. The home regularly sought feedback, and took ac