Archived: Ferrars Hall Care Home

Ferrars Hall Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care to older people and people living with dementia in one adapted building. The service can support up to 60 people.

We found the following examples of good practice.

The service was only receiving essential visitors at the time of our inspection. Any person entering the building had their temperature taken, completed a health questionnaire, sanitised their hands and wore full personal protective equipment (PPE) including a face visor.

The service had a dedicated visiting room which was accessible from indoors by people and outdoors for visits. This room and its facilities were adaptable such as for any person with a visual or hearing impairment or movement to a person's room. Although routine visits had been paused at the time of our inspection, the registered manager had a system in place so that relatives and friends could visit any person who was unwell or on end of life care. Visit times were based on the person's needs.

People were supported by staff in full PPE, whether that person was COVID-19 positive or negative. This is known as barrier nursing. This is to protect both staff and people living in the service from spreading infection if this occurred. The registered manager told us that they had changed systems within the service to reduce the spread of infection. Staff entered the building and undertook sanitising, took their temperatures and went to the area they worked with their PPE. This was in a staff changing area where they changed into a clean laundered uniform.

Audits and governance was effective in ensuring the premises were clean, odour and clutter free. During our inspection we observed staff supporting people and cleaning communal areas wearing their PPE. The registered manager told us that frequently touched areas were cleaned more often, with effective disinfection products. Staff also cleaned equipment at night when not in use such as people's wheelchairs and walking aids. Housekeeping staff followed a schedule to deep clean carpets, food servery and kitchenette areas.

The registered manager told us that they were working collaboratively with their local GP surgery. The GP had been allocated to the service as a clinical lead, and they were well supported as a result.

Ferrars Hall Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 66 older people, some of

whom are living with dementia. The service is over three floors and has various facilities available including a hair and nail bar, cinema room, coffee shop and a library. At the time of the inspection, 58 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff worked well together to ensure people were safe and cared for. They knew the people well and understood, and met, their needs. People were protected from avoidable harm by a staff team trained and confident to recognise and report any concerns. Staff assessed and minimised any potential risks to people. Staff followed the provider’s procedures to prevent the spread of infection and reduce the risk of cross contamination. The provider had systems in place to enable staff to safely manage people’s medicines.

The provider had systems in place to make sure they only employed staff once they had checked they were suitable to work with people who used the service. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs safely. People received care from staff who were trained and supported to meet people’s assessed needs.

Staff supported people to have enough to eat and drink and maintain a healthy weight. However, meal times were close together. The manager told us they would review this. They worked well with external professionals to support people to keep well.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support.

Staff supported people in a kind and friendly way. Staff were respectful when they spoke with, and about, people. They supported people to develop their independence. However, we saw some missed opportunities for people to further develop and or maintain their independence. People and their relatives were involved in their, or their family member's, care reviews. However, the manager was reviewing this to ensure relatives were satisfied with the level of information they received.

People’s care plans provided staff with guidance on how to meet each person’s needs and staff knew people well. Staff offered a range of activities and supported people with their interests. Staff could explain person-centred care, but they couldn’t always provide this because they didn’t have enough time. This meant people were not always encouraged to be involved in activities of daily living or supported in a person-centred way.

Staff supported people to express and wishes they had for their end of life care and followed these.

People and their families felt able to raise concerns which the provider addressed. The provider had systems in place, including a complaints procedure, to deal with any concerns or complaints. The provider and manager had put robust systems in place to effectively monitor the service and bring about further improvement.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for this service was Good (published 22 June 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 18 May 2017 and was unannounced. At the time of this inspection care and support was provided to 31 people. This was the first inspection since the home was registered in June 2016.

The provider is required to have a registered manager as one of their conditions of registration.

A registered manager was not in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the home. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe and staff were knowledgeable about reporting any incident of harm. People were looked after by enough staff to support them with their individual needs. Pre-employment checks were completed on staff before they were assessed to be suitable to look after people who lived at the home. People were looked after by staff who were trained and supported to do their job.

People were helped to take their medicines by staff who were trained and had been assessed as being competent to administer medicines.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts of food and drink. They were also supported to access health care services and their individual health and nutritional needs were met.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the Mental Capacity Act 2005 [MCA 2005] and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards [DoLS] and to report on what we find. The provider was aware of what they were required to do should any person lack mental capacity. People’s mental capacity was assessed and care was provided in their best interests. Staff were trained and knowledgeable about the application of the MCA.

People were treated by kind, respectful staff who enabled them to make choices about how they wanted to live. People and their relatives were given opportunities to be involved on a day-to-day basis about their planned care.

Not all care plans contained sufficient detail to ensure that staff had full information about how they should support people. This meant that there was a risk that staff, would not being fully aware of their responsibilities.

People were supported to be part of the community and they were helped to take part in recreational activities that were important to them. There was a process in place so that people’s concerns and complaints were listened to and were acted upon.

There were clear management arrangements in place. Staff, people and their relatives were able to make suggestions and actions were taken as a result. Quality monitoring procedures were in place and action was taken where improvements were identified.