Fernleigh Court Care and Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We observed both positive and less positive interactions between people and the staff team meaning people were not always treated with kindness, compassion and respect. People’s care plans did not contain detailed information about their preferences, likes and dislikes or how staff could support them to be independent or make choices. Staff did not consistently record people’s care and support. However, staff were passionate about supporting people and made efforts to get to know them and support them as individuals. We saw some kind and caring interactions between people and the staff team. We observed staff supporting people to make choices and people’s immediate needs were responded to in a timely manner.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff did not always treat people with kindness and compassion. For example, staff did not always knock when they entered people’s rooms. When one person was asleep staff repeatedly asked them to wake up for meals rather than leave them to rest. Staff did not always speak with people in a kind and reassuring manner when supporting them to eat. People were not supported to go to a quieter area away from other people when making personal phone calls, including those relating to health appointments. This meant other people could hear about their personal details and their health. Staff did not always refer to people with dignity and respect, for example by calling people who needed support to eat and drink as ‘feeders’. Staff did not always refer to people by their name when discussing them with other staff members and spoke about people’s personal care needs in front of other people. The language used to describe people in daily records was not always kind and compassionate. However, we also saw some positive interactions. Staff spoke with people kindly and took the time to make sure people were OK whilst supporting them. People were happy and relaxed being supported by the staff team. People and relatives were happy with their support. One person said, ‘‘[Staff] are a lovely bunch of people. They look after us all so well and I cannot praise them enough.’’ Relatives’ comments included, ‘‘I think what I have noticed is the smiles and cheerfulness. The staff there seem to be the right people for the job.’’ and ‘‘The carers have all seemed very helpful, friendly and kind. They are all very polite and nice.’’

People’s care plans were not always detailed and individualised about people’s individual support needs. In some cases, care plans had not been completed in relation to people’s individual support and health needs. Care plans did not contain information about how people liked to be treated as individuals in line with their likes, dislikes and preferences. Daily records were not always detailed and did not give a clear overview of how people had been supported in line with their support and health needs such as the monitoring of pressure area care or nutrition. Daily records did not give information about how people spent their day. One relative told us, ‘‘I am not sure all the staff truly know [family member] as an individual. I think they need more training or more time to get to know them properly.’’ However, staff knew people well as individuals and spoke confidently about their individual support needs. We observed staff engaging people in discussions about their interests. Work was being undertaken to make care plans and daily records more individualised. People’s rooms had been decorated according to their individual preferences. One person said, ‘‘[Staff] have taken the time to get to know how I like things done and we have a good chat.’’ Relative’s comments included, ‘‘They know [family member] well and they get on well with them. Everyone loves them.’’ and ‘‘All the staff, especially those who have worked there a while know [family member] really well and treat them like family.’’

People’s care plans were not always detailed regarding how staff could support them to make choices or be independent. This was particularly true for people who were not able to communicate and make choices verbally. Daily records did not contain information about whether people had been supported to make choices or be independent. Whilst methods to support people to make choices such as pictures were available for staff to use, we did not always see these being used to support people to make choices. Some people told us there were limited choices when it came to how they spent their time. One person said, ‘‘It can be a little boring here. [Staff] try and cater for everyone and what’s on offer is usually quite childish for my tastes.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘I think staff can be a little regimented sometimes. [Family member] would like more choice and to do things for themselves, but staff stick to their routines.’’ However, we observed staff to offer choices to people as they were supporting them. Staff were also considerate and patient when supporting people to be as independent as possible. Staff explained how they offered choices to people and the importance of doing this. The management team had started working to improve people’s care plans. One person said, ‘‘[Staff] are very patient with me and let me do things at my own pace.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘I think the staff do the best they can to help make sure [family member] can make their choices and do their own thing. There are limits because they have to be safe but all in all they do a good job.’’

Before the senior management had started working and improving issues at the service people’s immediate needs were not always responded to. For example, people were not always receiving their personal care and staff were not always asking health professionals to support people in a timely manner. Daily records were not detailed to make it clear how staff were supporting people with their immediate needs. We observed some people went for long periods of time without staff interaction. One person said, ‘‘It can sometimes be a while between seeing staff. I just spend the time by myself.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘I am not sure how quickly the staff respond when [family member] uses the call bell. A bit hit and miss when we are there.’’ However, we observed staff to answer call bells quickly. They also responded to people when they asked for support in a timely manner. The management team had started working with the staff team and had taken actions to start improving how daily records were being recorded. They had also significantly improved the care people received as explained throughout this report. This meant people were no longer at risk of not having their immediate needs met. One person said, ‘‘I have the call bell and whenever I use it staff come as quick as they can.’’ A relative told us, ‘‘[Staff] are very good and quick to support [family member] whenever they need any help.’’

Staff felt well supported by the management team. They told us how they were able to feed back about the service in different formats such as meetings but were also able to and felt comfortable approaching the management team on an informal basis. The registered manager had a good rapport with the staff team and worked directly with them to understand how best they could support them. The management team had identified staff supervisions and competency assessments were not happening in line with their policies. They now supported staff with supervision and competencies on a regular basis. Staff told us this had made them feel more supported than in previous months and that they had started to notice improvements happening at the service.