Fernbank

Updated 7 April 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 19 March and was announced.

Updated 7 April 2021

Fern Bank is a private care home which has been owned and managed by the same family for over 30 years. It is a large detached Victorian house, situated opposite a park, approximately one mile from Oldham town centre. Fern Bank is registered to provide support for up to 29 people who have mental health needs or physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 27 people living at the home. The service describe themselves as a therapeutic community which focuses on ‘normalisation’ to support people to overcome their mental health problems by providing a stable environment and meaningful interactions with other people.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. 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. The manager had been registered since January 2017.

The service used the local authority safeguarding procedures to report any safeguarding concerns. Staff had been trained in safeguarding topics and were aware of their responsibilities to report any possible abuse.

We found that safe recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.

The administration of medicines was safe. Staff had been trained in the administration of medicines and had up to date policies and procedures to follow.

The home was clean, tidy and homely in character. The environment was maintained to a very good standard.

Electrical and gas appliances were serviced regularly. Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) and there was a business plan for any unforeseen emergencies.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control and provided with the necessary equipment and hand washing facilities. This helped to protect the health and welfare of staff and people who used the service.

People were given choices in the food they ate and told us it was good. People were encouraged to eat and drink to ensure they were hydrated and well fed.

Staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities of how to apply for any best interest decisions under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and followed the correct procedures using independent professionals.

New staff received induction training to provide them with the skills to care for people. Staff files and the training matrix showed staff had undertaken sufficient training to meet the needs of people and they were supervised regularly to check their competence. Supervision sessions also gave staff the opportunity to discuss their work and ask for any training they felt necessary.

We observed meaningful interactions between staff and people who used the service. People told us staff were kind and caring.

People's day to day health needs were met by the staff and the service had good relationships with external healthcare professionals. Care records showed that people's needs were assessed before they started using the service and they were supported to transition to the service as smoothly as possible.

We saw from our observations of staff and records that people who used the service were given choices in many aspects of their lives and helped to develop their independence where possible.

We saw that the quality of care plans gave staff sufficient information to look after people accommodated at the care home and they were regularly reviewed.

We saw that people were able to attend activities of their choice and families and friends were able to visit when they wanted.