Fernbank

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment under a previous provider we rated this key question good.

This is the first assessment for this service under its new provider This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Accidents, incidents and complaints were documented along with actions taken and any learning outcomes. Audits of incident and accident records were carried out to ensure processes had been followed and identify any trends. Staff told us they felt able to raise concerns and make suggestions, and these were listened to and acted on. One staff member told us, “I haven’t had any concerns about the safety of the home. I feel as though anything has been actioned quickly to maintain the safety of everyone within and visiting the home.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

When people were transferred to hospital from the home, they took a ‘hospital pack’ with them. This contained relevant information about their care and support needs, any potential risks to their health and safety and any medicines they used. This ensured hospital staff had the appropriate information to care for the person while they were away from the service.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately with relevant authorities.

Information was on display throughout the service that reminded staff, people who used the service and visitors how to report any safeguarding concerns. Staff had completed safeguarding adults and children training and knew what to do if they had any safeguarding concerns. One relative told us, ‘‘My sister is 100% safe and is happy living in this home.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Potential risks to people’s health, safety and welfare were assessed appropriately and risk assessments included detailed measures to help reduce risks. Behaviour risk assessments contained details of potential triggers which might lead to a deterioration in a person’s behaviour or mental health, and the measures needed to help protect them. People’s risk assessments and care plans were regularly reviewed to ensure they continued to reflect people’s needs and remained effective in keeping them safe.

Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP). These provide guidance for staff and the emergency services on the support people need to safely evacuate the premises in an emergency.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The home was well maintained and provided a safe environment. Checks of the environment and equipment were up to date. Fire exits were clear and regular fire safety checks and fire drills had been completed. There were several communal lounges and a dining room for people to use, and furniture was generally in good condition. There was a large attractive front garden with trees, shrubs, lawn and garden furniture and an area at the rear of the property where people could smoke safely.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

There was a thorough recruitment process in place to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. All new staff completed an induction and worked several ‘shadow’ shifts with experienced staff, to help them become familiar with the service, and what was expected of them. New staff completed a 6-month probationary period, with a review of their work after the first 3 months. All staff completed regular training, both on-line and face-to-face, to ensure they had the knowledge and skills needed for their roles and received regular supervision from senior staff. A staff member told us, “I have supervisions every few months with the registered manager. We discuss the home in general, staff, residents, safeguarding, health and safety and any additional items I might bring up or the manager wishes to discuss, this includes annual leave and my own wellbeing.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The service was clean and free from any odour. Housekeeping staff cleaned during the day, with some cleaning tasked completed by night staff. Check lists and records were in place to evidence good cleaning practices. Staff had completed training in infection prevention and control, food safety and health and safety. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was readily available, and we saw staff using it correctly. Staff had completed an annual hand hygiene audit which ensured they followed the correct process for thorough hand washing.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.

Robust processes were in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed. Regular stock balance checks and audits were carried out, including an audit from an external pharmacy. Staff responsible for managing medicines had completed training and had their competence assessed and regularly reviewed. We observed a member of staff administering the lunchtime medicines. This was done from the medicines room, which was clean and tidy. The staff member demonstrated a calm approach with residents and ensured privacy when applying topical medicines. Some people were able to self-administer their medicines, which were stored in a safe in their rooms. Risk assessments were in place to ensure it was safe for people to manage their own medicines and staff made regular checks to ensure they remained competent to do so.