CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Ferndale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, suitable safeguarding arrangements, enough staff, safe recruitment and safe medicines management. The home was also meeting infection prevention requirements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried forward from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. The report says people received kind and compassionate care, but no current rating was given for Caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried forward from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers promoted a positive, person-centred culture, listened to views and reviewed incidents. They were updating the governance system because they felt the existing system needed improvement.
What inspectors found, July 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, while some records and governance systems were still being improved.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over five days in June and July 2023. One inspector met two people living at the home, contacted a relative, spoke with managers and staff, and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe and Well-led were both rated Good. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were enough, and infection control arrangements were suitable.
People were supported to make choices and live as independently as possible. Staff provided kind and individual care. Managers were approachable and involved people and families in care discussions.
The inspection only assessed Safe and Well-led. The ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection, which was also rated Good overall in 2018.
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make decisions, use their strengths and work towards their goals. The care focused on choice, control and independence.
“People were supported to have maximum possible choice, control and independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff understood people's individual needs and protected their privacy and dignity.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to give medicines. Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed in line with current guidance.
“People were supported safely with medicines. Infection prevention and control practices reflected current guidance.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found there were enough staff during the day and night to meet people's needs and spend meaningful time with them.
“There were enough staff to safely care for people.” from the report
Capacity records being reviewed
needs fixingManagers were still reviewing care records so that capacity assessments and best-interests documents were specific to each decision and accurate.
“The registered managers were in the process of reviewing people's care records to ensure all capacity assessments and 'best interests' documents were decision specific and accurate.” from the report
Governance system being updated
needs fixingManagers said the existing governance system needed updating and were working to create a more robust system.
“They were currently in the process of creating a more robust governance system, as they felt the existing one needed updating.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with reviewing capacity assessments and best-interests documents?
- 02What changes are being made to create the more robust governance system mentioned in the report?
- 03How do you check that risk assessments remain detailed and reflect each person's current needs?
- 04How do staff support each person to make choices, work towards goals and spend meaningful time?
- 05How are medicines checks and staff competency assessments kept up to date?
This inspection covered Safe and Well-led only; the Effective, Caring and Responsive ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 July 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, June 2018
Ferndale rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some care records and staff supervision records needing improvement.
Inspectors visited on 19, 23 and 27 April 2018. This was a comprehensive, announced inspection. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and other professionals, looked around the home, observed care and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
People told inspectors they felt safe and had enough staff support. Medicines were managed safely. Staff knew people well, supported their health and nutrition, and helped them make choices, build independence, take part in activities and stay connected with their community.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. The overall rating stayed Good, as it had been at the previous inspection in January and February 2016.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to respond promptly and support people with activities. Relatives also said staff were available when needed.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe and contingencies were in place to ensure that staff knew people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicine administration and storage were checked. People who wanted to manage their own medicines were supported to do so with safety checks in place.
“We found appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe administration and storage of medicines.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff supported privacy, dignity, choice and independence. People were encouraged to do everyday tasks and make their own decisions.
“We observed staff and people who used the service interacting and saw that staff treated people with dignity and respect, for example knocking before entering a person's bedroom.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People chose social activities, hobbies, work, volunteering and training. Support was linked to individual interests and community involvement.
“People were supported to play an active role in their local community, which supported and empowered their independence.” from the report
Positive culture
People, relatives, staff and other professionals gave positive feedback about the home. Managers were regularly present and knew people well.
“Comments from people, relatives, staff and visiting healthcare professionals indicated there was a positive, person centred culture within the service.” from the report
Risk records were inconsistent
needs fixingRisk assessments were not in a standard format, were sometimes changed by hand and were not kept in the same place in every file. Managers had started a full review.
“risk assessments were not in a standard format, were sometimes amended several times by hand making them more difficult to read” from the report
Care files were hard to navigate
needs fixingCare plan styles varied and some information was difficult to locate quickly. Managers had begun reviewing and auditing the files.
“The styles and content of files varied and some files were updated several times by hand, meaning information could be difficult to locate immediately.” from the report
Supervision and quality records
minorSome supervision discussions were informal and not recorded, and staff appraisals had not yet taken place. The quality assurance system also needed minor updates, which were made during the inspection.
“Some of the discussions that took place were documented; however, both staff and the registered managers told us that meetings took place more frequently but where not always recorded.” from the report
- 01Have all care plans and risk assessments now been moved into a clear, consistent format?
- 02How do you make sure staff can quickly find the latest risk information for each person?
- 03Have all planned staff supervisions and appraisals now been completed and recorded?
- 04What changes were made to the quality assurance system after the inspection?
- 05How do you continue to support each person's chosen activities, work, volunteering and independence?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in January and February 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 June 2018 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 Ferndale
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 June 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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.