CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Fern Gardens Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed, staffing was considered sufficient, and medicines were generally given safely, but patch application sites were not always recorded.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff were trained and supported, people received suitable food and healthcare, and consent and best-interest decisions were managed in line with the law.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. They were offered choices and involved in decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly updated. People could take part in activities, maintain relationships and receive support that met their communication and end-of-life care needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture and systems for checking quality, handling complaints and learning from incidents. People, relatives and staff said they felt listened to and valued.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Fern Gardens Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a medicines-recording shortfall.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 18 April 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines and management records, and observed care.
People told inspectors they were happy and felt safe. Staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors found that care was personalised, medicines were usually given safely, the home was clean and well maintained, and people could take part in activities and make choices about their care.
One shortfall was found in medicines records. Staff did not always record where medicated patches had been applied. The management team put systems in place to improve this. All five areas were rated Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 12 March 2022.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed staff offering choices, allowing people time to respond and dealing sensitively with distress.
“They allowed people to make choices and take their time to respond.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs and preferences. These plans were reviewed and updated.
“People received personalised care which met their needs and reflected their preferences.” from the report
Good support with health
Staff worked with healthcare professionals and made referrals when people's needs changed. People could see doctors and other professionals when needed.
“People's healthcare needs were assessed, monitored and met.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could choose from group and individual activities. Visitors were welcomed and could join in social events and support their relatives.
“People were supported to take part in a range of different social and leisure activities.” from the report
Quality checks and learning
The home used audits, meetings and investigations to monitor care and make improvements when problems were identified.
“There were effective systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service.” from the report
Incomplete patch records
needs fixingStaff did not always record where medicated patches had been applied. This information helps staff rotate application sites and check that an old patch has been removed.
“However, we found the staff did not always record the application site for medicated patches.” from the report
Recruitment pressures
minorThe provider said recruiting enough staff for different departments had been challenging. Temporary agency staff were sometimes needed, although the same regular agency staff were used and supported.
“The provider had found recruiting the right numbers of staff for different departments a challenge.” from the report
- 01What checks are now used to make sure the application site for every medicated patch is recorded?
- 02How often are temporary agency staff used, and how do you make sure they know each person's care needs?
- 03What activities are available for someone with my relative's interests, communication needs or mobility?
- 04How will my relative and our family be involved if their health or care needs change?
- 05How can we raise a concern or complaint, and how will you tell us what was done in response?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises, care and infection prevention measures. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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, March 2022
Previously in Special Measures, the home is now rated Good, but medicine allergy records still need improvement.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 2 March 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, checked medicines and reviewed care, staffing and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as happy, respected and well cared for. Inspectors found enough staff, personalised care, activities, support with food and drink, and access to healthcare.
There was one continuing concern. Some medicine records did not accurately record one person's allergy. The home took further action after the inspection, and inspectors recommended that its recording processes be reviewed.
The previous inspection had rated the home Inadequate overall, with several legal breaches. Inspectors found enough improvement for the home to be no longer in breach and no longer in Special Measures.
Kind and respectful care
People had good relationships with staff, were offered choices and were treated with patience and respect.
“We observed the staff providing gentle, kind and patient care towards people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, choices and preferences. Staff used different communication methods to help people understand and make decisions.
“People received care which met their needs and reflected their preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered a wide range of group and individual activities, including food events, crafts, music, games and trips.
“The provider employed a wellbeing coordinator who had planned a wide range of different events and activities each day.” from the report
Medicine allergy records
needs fixingSome medicine administration records for one person did not show their allergy accurately. Inspectors recommended reviewing the home's processes and policy to prevent this risk.
“Some of the Medicines Administration Records (MARs) for one person did not record their medicines allergy accurately.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that every medicine allergy is recorded accurately in all relevant records?
- 02What action did you take after inspectors identified the inaccurate allergy records?
- 03How do you monitor whether the improvements made since the previous inspection are being maintained?
- 04How are people's personalised care plans reviewed when their needs or preferences change?
- 05How will you make sure there are enough suitable staff if several staff are absent at the same time?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five ratings, with specific checks on medicines, infection prevention and COVID-19 vaccination requirements. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 March 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 Fern Gardens Care Home
9 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2021InadequateSafe: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedEffective: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- February 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Inspected but not ratedEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedEffective: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 October 2017.
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 Hounslow
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 £1,270 a week. 85 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.”
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
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.