Archived: Ferndale House

We received an action plan from the provider to tell us that they would be compliant with all outcomes by 31 December 2013.

At the time of our inspection there were 9 people living at the home. During our inspection we spoke with the registered provider and five members of staff. There was no registered manager employed for this service at the time of this inspection.

We saw that staff treated people in a kind and gentle manner respecting their dignity at all times. However, we found that there was a lack of understanding of the use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, for people who did not have the capacity to make decisions.

We found that people's needs were assessed, however care and treatment was not always planned in line with their individual needs. Risk assessments for people were not always individualised and often lacked clarity or provided conflicting information.

We found that there were not effective systems in place to reduce the risks and spread of infection. A recent outbreak of infection in this home had been managed by staff without direction or leadership and there were no clear records to support this work.

During this inspection we found that people were not protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

The provider did not have an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

During this inspection we found that people were not protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. We saw that whilst medicines had been prescribed safely they were not always given to people appropriately. An error which had occurred had not been dealt with according to the provider's medicines policy.

Before people received any care and treatment the provider told us that they were asked for their consent and that the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. However, we found that there was a lack of understanding of the use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 by staff who were implementing plans of care.

We saw that staff treated people in a dignified and respectful way at all times.

The provider did not have effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

The planning of care meant that there was a risk that people's individual needs and welfare and safety was not fully protected. Some care plans did not provide sufficient guidance to members of staff about the actions they needed to take to meet specific personal care and medical care needs of people living at the home. It was not evident that all people were able to access social and leisure activities that met their personal interests, wishes and needs.

The home was clean and tidy. However, there was not an effective system to assess the risk of, and to prevent, detect and control the spread of health associated infection. This meant there was a potential risk that people would not be protected from the risk of preventable infections.

There was sufficient staff on duty at any one time to meet the needs of people using the service. There was a plan in place to ensure members of staff had the skills and knowledge to provide effective and appropriate care and support to people living at Ferndale House.

There was not a formal process being put in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided at Ferndale House. However, the service was able to demonstrate that informal methods of quality assurance had been taking place. The service was able to demonstrate that learning took place from incidents and complaints. We were given examples of where care practices had been altered as a result of complaints received with the aim of improving the outcomes for people using the service.

For the purpose of this report we did not visit the location. We asked the provider to provide us with information and documents regarding consent to care and treatment and complaints in order that we could judge whether they were meeting these essential standards. The information we received indicated that the home was meeting these essential standards of quality and safety.