CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Farnham Mill Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines management and infection control arrangements. They also found systems for learning from accidents and incidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found that care records and quality monitoring had improved. They found supportive management, good teamwork and systems for identifying and acting on issues.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Farnham Mill Nursing Home is Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and improved leadership, but this was a focused inspection.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 6 July 2021. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicines, accident records and quality checks.
The inspection was prompted by concerns about staffing levels and how staff were managed. Inspectors found enough staff on each shift, suitable recruitment checks, safe medicines management and good infection control arrangements. They found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concerns being reviewed.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and well-led were both rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used for the overall rating. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Staffing and continuity
Inspectors found enough staff on each shift. The provider did not use agency staff, so people were cared for by consistent staff who knew them well.
“There were enough staff on each shift to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe care planning
Risks were assessed and plans were put in place to reduce them. Staff understood people's individual risks and how to support them safely.
“Assessments had been carried out to identify any risks involved in people's care and plans had been developed to mitigate these.” from the report
Medicines and infection control
Inspectors found safe arrangements for ordering, storing and administering medicines. They were also assured that infection prevention measures were in place.
“People's medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Improved leadership
The previous well-led rating was Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that the home had acted on earlier advice, with more accurate care records and stronger quality monitoring.
“At this inspection, we found the provider had taken action to improve.” from the report
Listening to families
People and relatives said their views were encouraged and listened to. During the pandemic, relatives were kept informed through online meetings and regular emails.
“People and their relatives told us their views about the service were listened to.” from the report
Busy mornings
minorStaff said some shifts were busier than others. One staff member said people could sometimes wait a little in the morning, although inspectors found people were kept safe.
“First thing in the morning, [people] can wait a little sometimes but if we explain to them, it is OK, they do not mind waiting a few minutes.” from the report
- 01How many staff are planned for each shift now, especially during busy mornings?
- 02How do you check that people are not waiting too long for help at busy times?
- 03How are relatives involved as care partners, and what visiting arrangements are currently available?
- 04What changes have been made since the previous recommendation about care records and quality assurance?
- 05How do you use falls reviews and other incident reviews to change people's care?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over into the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 August 2021 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, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that the home had strong COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than giving a full service rating.
Inspectors were assured that the home used personal protective equipment safely, provided testing, managed visitors and admissions safely, and followed shielding and social distancing rules.
They found the home clean and hygienic. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through visiting areas, a visiting pod, a gazebo and video calls.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall rating or ratings for the other care areas.
Contact with relatives
People had several ways to keep in touch with their loved ones, including a visiting pod, a gazebo, a visiting area and video calls.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their loved ones in a variety of ways.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and enhanced cleaning was used for high-touch areas.
“The service was clean and hygienic throughout. Cleaning schedules had been adapted to ensure enhanced cleaning of high touch areas.” from the report
Staff infection control training
Staff had access to PPE and were trained to use and dispose of it safely. Training was carried out in the areas where staff worked.
“Infection control training was provided to staff in small groups in the areas they worked.” from the report
Individual risk planning
Care plans identified additional risks. People recovering from COVID-19 could have activities to support respiratory recovery.
“Individual care plans had been devised to ensure any additional risks to people receiving safe care had been identified.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently supported to meet residents safely, and are the visiting pod, gazebo and visiting area still available?
- 02How often are high-touch areas cleaned, and how is this recorded?
- 03What PPE and infection control training do staff currently receive?
- 04How are residents and staff tested for infections, and how are positive results managed?
- 05How are individual care plans updated when someone has additional infection or recovery risks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not provide a full service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 2021 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 Farnham Mill Nursing Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 July 2018.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.