CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Fernihurst Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems, appropriate staffing and effective infection prevention measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not looked at during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and staff understood people's preferences, communication needs and emotional needs. Complaints were handled promptly and relatives said communication was good.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers had clear responsibilities and used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care. Staff and relatives described the management as approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, responsive and well-led care, with improvements since the previous rating of Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 6 May 2021. Three inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care, medicine, staff and management records.
The home was calm and welcoming. People said they felt safe and received their medicines on time. Inspectors found caring staff, personalised support, good communication with families and suitable action when people's health or risks changed.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe, Responsive and Well-led also rated Good. The inspection found improvements from the previous Requires Improvement rating in 2019. Effective and Caring were not examined during this visit, so their previous ratings were used in the overall rating.
Stable, attentive staff
The home had a stable staff team with different skills and experience. Staff worked together, knew people well and responded calmly.
“People benefited from a conscientious stable staff team with a variety of experience and skills.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff understood people's histories, interests, communication styles and changing needs. Care plans were based on people's individual needs and preferences.
“Care plans were accurate as the content described the people we met.” from the report
Strong management oversight
Managers spent time with people and staff and used audits and feedback to check the quality of care.
“There was a robust system of audits to monitor the standard of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are activities and entertainment organised now that COVID-19 restrictions have changed?
- 02How will you keep our relative and family updated if their health or care needs change?
- 03How do you check that medicines, including as-required medicines, are given safely and recorded correctly?
- 04How do you make sure care plans and risk assessments are updated when a person's needs change?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective and Caring at the previous comprehensive inspection, and what has changed since then?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings were used in calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 July 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, July 2019
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care, but personal care records and management oversight were not reliable enough.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection over two visits in April 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines, staffing, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Caring. People said they felt safe. Medicines were managed safely, staffing levels met people's needs, and staff were described as kind, respectful and compassionate.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Responsive and Well-led. Some people looked unshaven or unkempt and had poor oral care. Care records did not always clearly explain personal care needs, and quality checks had not found all the problems.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, when Safe was Inadequate and the provider was in breach of three regulations. At this inspection, the previous breaches had been addressed, but further improvement was still needed.
Safe medicines
Medicines were administered as prescribed. Records, storage and staff training had improved since the previous inspection.
“Medicines were administered safely, and people received their medicines in the way prescribed for them.” from the report
Staffing and call bells
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and saw call bells being answered promptly. Response times were monitored through regular audits.
“There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people's needs and keep them safe and call bells were answered promptly.” from the report
Healthcare support
The home had good working relationships with local health professionals. A GP visited weekly, with regular input from community nursing and mental health teams.
“There was a good relationship with the local health professionals. A GP routinely visited on a weekly basis.” from the report
Activities and personal interests
Staff supported people to take part in activities and used life stories, hobbies, music and conversation to provide social stimulation.
“The provider employed an activity person who worked with people to ascertain their preferred activities and hobbies.” from the report
Personal care was inconsistent
needs fixingSome people were seen unshaven, with poor oral care and looking unkempt. Care plans did not clearly guide staff about oral, hair and nail care.
“Some people were observed on the first day of the inspection, unshaven, with poor oral care and looking a little unkempt.” from the report
Quality checks missed problems
seriousThe provider's checks did not identify gaps in personal care records, agency staff checks and action on health and safety issues. Inspectors said this placed people at risk of poor or unsafe care.
“This placed people at risk of receiving poor unsafe care.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no manager registered with CQC at the time of the inspection. A management team was in place while the provider looked for a new manager.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).” from the report
Complaints were not always recorded
minorA relative's concern about a carpet had not been recorded in the complaints folder. The management team said it would improve how concerns and grumbles were recorded.
“This concern had not been recorded in the provider's complaints folder.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure every person's oral, hair and nail care needs are clearly recorded and completed?
- 02How do managers check each day that people have received the personal care set out in their care plans?
- 03What checks are completed before agency staff start work, including identity checks and induction?
- 04Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and what is the timetable for appointing a registered manager?
- 05How are concerns and informal complaints recorded, followed up and reported back to families?
This was an unannounced scheduled comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the previous ratings reviewed after the September 2018 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 July 2019 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 Fernihurst Nursing Home
5 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2021Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.