CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fernleigh House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a recommendation about handwritten medicines records.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 7 November 2017. The inspector observed care, reviewed two people's care records and checked medicines, policies, quality systems and two staff files. Feedback was also gathered from staff, relatives, community professionals and commissioners.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, suitable staffing, good training, kind staff and person-centred care plans. People were supported with activities, community life, communication and maintaining relationships.
Medicines were generally managed well, but handwritten entries on medicine records had not been checked and signed by two staff. The inspector made a recommendation to reduce the risk of transcription errors. The home had been rated Good at the previous inspection and remained Good.
Detailed risk planning
The home had detailed assessments covering health, environmental risks, behaviours that challenged and activities. Staff had clear guidance about how to reduce risks.
“The risk assessments we saw were very detailed and covered a wide range of areas including specific activities, behaviours that challenged physical aggression and self-harm, as well as any contributory factors identified.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff interacting gently with people and found that privacy, dignity and independence were consistently promoted.
“Staff were enthusiastic and approached people in a gentle and caring manner.” from the report
Personalised communication
Care records explained how each person communicated, including through facial expressions, sounds, pictograms and communication dictionaries. Staff used these individual methods.
“The care records of those who lived at the home provided staff with detailed guidance about how certain disabilities affected them.” from the report
Strong monitoring
The home used audits, surveys, meetings and action plans to check the quality of care and respond to findings.
“A business plan was in place and systems had been established to effectively assess and monitor the staff team and the quality of service provided through a structured auditing process.” from the report
Handwritten medicine entries
needs fixingHandwritten entries on medicine administration records had not been checked and signed by two staff. The inspector recommended that entries should be signed, witnessed and countersigned to reduce the risk of transcription errors.
“However, we saw hand written entries had not been checked and signed by two staff.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure handwritten medicine entries are signed, witnessed and countersigned?
- 02How is the reported 1:1 staffing arrangement maintained when staff are absent or people’s needs change?
- 03How will you communicate with my relative using their individual methods, such as pictograms, facial expressions or communication dictionaries?
- 04What activities, community outings, holidays and weekend trips would be available for my relative?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in best-interest decisions and care plan reviews?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas of the service, including the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 January 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 Fernleigh House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 January 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.