CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Farm Lane
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Requires Improvement; inspectors found people generally felt safe, but unreliable night-care records led to a governance breach and warning notice.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 20 and 24 February 2023. Inspectors first looked at safeguarding concerns, then widened the inspection to how the home was managed. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers, and reviewed care and management records.
People and families said they felt safe and that the home kept them updated. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding and infection-control arrangements, regular clinical meetings and audits, and staff who felt supported. However, night staff had filled in some welfare-check and turning records before the checks happened. This meant inspectors could not be sure that the checks had taken place.
Inspectors also found that people's preferences about receiving personal care from male staff were not always clearly assessed or recorded. The overall rating changed from Good to Requires Improvement. Safe was inspected but not rated, while Well-led was rated Requires Improvement.
Safeguarding
Staff understood how to report abuse concerns. Inspectors found clear reporting and investigation processes, and local authority representatives were confident that concerns were being reported appropriately.
“There were clear processes for reporting suspected abuse to the local authority and investigating concerns where appropriate.” from the report
People felt safe
People and their relatives told inspectors they felt safe in the home.
“People using the service and their families felt safe using the service.” from the report
Family involvement
The home held relative meetings, gathered family feedback and used this to make changes, including to catering and activities.
“The service engaged effectively with people and their relatives to identify how the service could improve and to address any concerns that people may have.” from the report
Personal care preferences
needs fixingTwo women were supported with personal care by male staff, but staff were not always clear about how people's preferences had been recorded. Inspectors recommended reviewing the procedures to make sure consent was clear.
“We observed 2 female residents who were receiving support with personal care from male staff.” from the report
- 01What additional night-time checks have been introduced since the inspection?
- 02How do you now make sure welfare checks and turning checks are completed before staff record them?
- 03How will you record and confirm a person's preference about receiving personal care from male or female staff?
- 04What action plan was given to the CQC after the warning notice, and what progress has been made?
- 05When will the whole Safe key question be inspected again?
This was a targeted inspection of safeguarding and Well-led, with infection control also reviewed; the other key question ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 May 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Farm Lane rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 29 July and 3 August 2022. They spoke with people, staff and health professionals, observed care and reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, complaints, incidents and audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found clear risk guidance, accurate daily records, safe medicines management, enough staff and good infection control. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare and decisions about their care.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement in August 2021. The home had breached the good governance regulation at that inspection. Inspectors found improvements had been made and the home was now meeting that regulation.
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so the overall rating also used ratings from the previous inspection.
Risk records
Care plans and risk assessments gave staff clear instructions. Daily checks and records, including repositioning charts, were completed accurately and on time.
“At this inspection, we found all daily records which included hourly welfare checks for people, food and fluid charts and repositioning charts were being completed accurately and on time.” from the report
Medicines safety
Medicines were ordered, stored and given safely. Electronic alerts and pharmacist checks helped the home identify possible errors.
“The provider managed people's medicines safely. Staff had completed medicines administration training and were clear about their responsibilities.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection prevention arrangements, including safe visiting, cleaning and protective equipment.
“We were assured that this service met good infection prevention and control guidelines.” from the report
Governance improvements
The home had introduced more detailed oversight since the last inspection. Audits, clinical review meetings and follow-up actions were being used to improve care.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was now meeting this regulation.” from the report
Food and nutrition
People's nutrition and choking risks were assessed. Dietary preferences and alternatives were provided, and inspectors found the sampled food appetising and served at the right temperature.
“We sampled the food on the first day of our inspection and found it to be appetising and served at the right temperature.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that daily welfare, food and fluid, and repositioning records remain complete and accurate?
- 02What checks are currently used to make sure medicines are given safely, and how often does the pharmacist review them?
- 03What infection control and visiting arrangements are in place now, and how would these change during an outbreak?
- 04How are concerns found through audits discussed, acted on and checked again?
- 05How will you show that the improvements made since the previous inspection have been maintained?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and the overall rating used ratings from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Farm Lane
6 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- May 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2022GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hammersmith and Fulham
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,300 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“The quality of life that she's given my parents has been priceless. The peace of mind she's given my sisters and I, through a very difficult time, has been invaluable.”
“She has an unusual combination of kindness and firmness, is quite unflappable, physically strong, extremely savvy”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.