CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ferfoot Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Risks were assessed and managed, medicines were administered safely, and infection control arrangements were in place. Staffing numbers observed during the inspection were safe, although recruitment had been difficult.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had received training and support, and people were helped to eat, drink and access healthcare. Care planning included people's needs, choices and best-interest decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw staff provide care with dignity and respect. People and relatives described staff as kind and caring, and people were encouraged to remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's personal history, communication needs, cultural and social needs. Records of monitoring and repositioning had improved and were being checked.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management and oversight had improved, but inspectors said leadership was still inconsistent and more time was needed to show that improvements were embedded. A whistleblowing concern about PPE and moving and handling was raised during the inspection, although inspectors found no evidence to substantiate it.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Ferfoot Care Home is rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but the home was not always well-led and improvements still needed to become established.
Inspectors visited without advance notice on 14 December 2021 and 7 January 2022. They spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicine, recruitment, safety and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm, received their medicines safely, had their health needs supported and were treated with kindness and dignity.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had improved since the previous inspection, but inspectors said it was too early to know whether the changes would last. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
Safety and risk management
The home identified risks to people and the environment and put plans in place. Incidents were reviewed and lessons were shared with staff.
“Risks to people's safety were identified and action taken to mitigate risks.” from the report
Medicines
Staff were trained and their competence was checked. Inspectors saw medicines given safely, with no gaps in the records they reviewed.
“People had their own medicines administration record and we observed there were no gaps in recording.” from the report
Kind and dignified care
Staff knew people well and inspectors saw care being delivered respectfully. People and relatives gave positive feedback about the staff.
“People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Improved care records
Monitoring and repositioning records had improved since the previous inspection. The records inspected were completed fully and accurately.
“At this inspection this had improved, and we observed records were completed in full.” from the report
Leadership improvements not yet established
needs fixingThe home had made progress, but inspectors found management and leadership remained inconsistent. They wanted more time to see whether the improvements would continue.
“At this inspection we found the service had continued to improve but time was needed to see the improvements embedded into practice.” from the report
Recruitment difficulties
needs fixingThe provider said recruiting staff had been challenging. It was limiting new admissions to help ensure staffing remained safe.
“The provider told us recruitment had been challenging in recent months, so they were supporting the home by not taking many new admissions.” from the report
Moving and handling concern raised
needs fixingDuring the inspection, a concern was raised about PPE and moving and handling practice. The provider took action and reported the allegation to safeguarding, but inspectors found no evidence to substantiate the concern.
“During the inspection we received a whistleblowing concern about staff not wearing appropriate PPE and not following moving and handling good practice.” from the report
- 01What specific checks are now used to make sure the improvements in leadership remain consistent?
- 02How are you managing recruitment difficulties, and how do you decide whether staffing is sufficient before accepting a new resident?
- 03What action was taken after the concern about PPE and moving and handling, and how is safe practice now checked?
- 04How often are care monitoring and repositioning records reviewed, and what happens if a problem is found?
- 05Which refurbishment and maintenance improvements are planned, and when are they expected to be completed?
This was a follow-up inspection checking the provider's action plan and earlier concerns, including all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the report also refers to the previous comprehensive inspection in April 2021. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 January 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.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found important improvements after earlier concerns about consent, records and management.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 10 August 2021. Inspectors checked whether the home had fixed problems from the previous inspection, including concerns about consent and management systems. They also checked infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found improvements. Medicines records were complete, risks had been reviewed, and decisions made for people who could not consent were recorded. Care records and monitoring charts were more accurate, and staff had better guidance.
The inspection did not give new ratings. The previous overall rating of Requires Improvement remains in place. Safe and Effective were previously Requires Improvement, and Well-led was previously Inadequate. Caring and Responsive were not assessed in this targeted visit.
Improved medicines records
Medicines administration records had no gaps. Handwritten entries were checked and signed by two staff members, and creams had been dated when opened.
“People's MAR's were completed in full with no gaps in recording.” from the report
Better risk guidance
Risk plans had been reviewed and gave staff more detailed guidance. Sensor mats checked by inspectors were working.
“At this inspection we observed epilepsy management plans had been reviewed by staff and contained more information.” from the report
Consent decisions recorded
Where people could not make particular decisions, the home recorded capacity assessments and best-interest decisions for restrictions such as sensor mats.
“Where people lacked capacity there was evidence to demonstrate decisions had been made in people's best interest.” from the report
Improved management and communication
The provider had an improvement plan and reviewed it weekly. Staff had more regular meetings and said communication had improved.
“We do daily meetings now. I feel a lot more updated now, the communication has improved a lot.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about testing, protective equipment, visiting arrangements, cleanliness and the home's arrangements for preventing or managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
The full service was not reassessed
needs fixingThis inspection only checked specific previous concerns. It did not review all parts of the key questions, so the earlier overall rating remains Requires Improvement.
“Targeted inspections do not change the rating from the previous inspection.” from the report
- 01How are medicines records checked now, and what happens if a recording error is found?
- 02How do you record and review best-interest decisions for people who cannot consent to restrictions or care?
- 03How are risk plans, care plans and monitoring records checked to make sure they remain accurate and consistent?
- 04What actions from the service improvement plan are still outstanding?
- 05When will the home next have a full inspection covering all five questions?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of specific concerns under Safe, Effective and Well-led, plus infection control; it did not reassess the full key questions, and Caring and Responsive were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 September 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 Ferfoot Care Home
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedEffective: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- June 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 July 2013.
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 two hours of Wiltshire
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 £1,020 to £1,340 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Linet became her carer and all changed, my daughter started eating, taking her medications and more important her happiness came back.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.