Archived: The Fearnes

Updated 24 February 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 14 and 19 November 2014 and was unannounced. There were two inspectors and an expert by experience who had experience of services for older people in the inspection team. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

During the two day inspection we spoke with ten people who lived at The Fearnes and one visiting relative. We also spoke with the registered manager, the chef, a member of ancillary staff and eight members of care staff. We observed how people were supported and looked at three people’s care and support records. Because some people living in the home were living with dementia and were not able to tell us about their experiences we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific method of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We looked at records relating to the management of the service including: three staff files, staffing rotas, incident and accident records, training records, meeting minutes and three peoples care plans and medication administration records.

Before our inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included information the provider had sent us about incidents.

We did not ask the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) before our inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they planned to make. This was because we had brought forward this inspection in response to information that had been shared with us about the care provided to people living at the home.

Updated 24 February 2015

We undertook an unannounced inspection to The Fearnes on 14 and 19 November 2014. The Fearnes is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 40 older people, many of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 37 people living there.

At the last inspection in April 2014 the service was meeting the regulations inspected. There was a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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 Socail Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe and free from harm and were treated with dignity and respect by a caring, professional team of staff. Staff demonstrated a good awareness of ensuring people were kept safe and were able to explain how they would report suspected abuse.

The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities in regard to the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). These safeguards aim to protect people living in care homes and hospitals from being inappropriately deprived of their liberty. These safeguards can only be used when there is no other way of supporting a person safely. DoLS applications were correctly completed and submitted to the local authority.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. People’s needs were met in a timely manner with people not having to wait lengthy periods for call bells to be answered. The registered manager told us they were recruiting a further three staff. Staff told us once the three additional staff were employed they felt there were enough staff employed to run the home effectively. Suitable employment checks had been completed before staff commenced their employment.

Staff felt well supported by the management team and involved in the running of the home. They said they took an active part in the team meetings and felt comfortable to raise any ideas or concerns. There was a system in place to ensure staff received relevant training.

People were treated with respect and dignity by staff who demonstrated a caring, patient and friendly manner. People’s privacy was maintained, with staff providing discreet support and guidance. Staff knocked on people’s bedroom doors before entering bedrooms and explained clearly to people what they needed to do in a sensitive and considerate manner before supporting people with their care needs. Staff appeared to know the people who lived in the home well and spent time sitting and talking with them, ensuring they enjoyed their day.

People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered to meet their needs. For example, records showed people who had been assessed as having a high risk of skin damage were referred to the local specialist healthcare professionals. Staff had followed the guidance given by the specialist to ensure people’s skin integrity was maintained. Staff were able to discuss individual people and demonstrated a good knowledge of their care needs. Staff told us what activities people enjoyed doing and how people were supported to take part in activities they preferred. People told us they enjoyed the trips out in the mini bus and helping to make cakes. We saw photographs on display of people enjoying outings such as trips to Christchurch Quay and The New Forest.

The provider had a complaints procedure and people knew how to complain if they needed to. People felt if they needed to complain they would be listened to and any complaint acted upon. The management team had acknowledged complaints, and investigated and notified all parties as to their outcome.

The provider completed a variety of weekly, monthly and annual audits to check the quality of their service, such as; infection control, dementia care and dining experiences. Where actions had been highlighted the provider had put systems in place to ensure good practice was communicated to staff. For example, the infection control audit highlighted good practice needed to be shared regarding handwashing, the provider then ensured this topic was a regular agenda item at the staff meetings.

The home expressed a warm and friendly culture with staff stating they felt they worked well as a team and supported each other. One person told us, “I’m very happy here, the staff are so friendly and always cheer me up”.