Fernside Hall Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 68 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People had said in the provider’s survey last year that they did not feel fully involved in their care planning. The action recorded to address this was for monthly reviews to be held with people. However, use of the wording ‘allowing’ people to be involved in the planning of their care did not assure us that a wholly person-centred approach was in place. In a more recent survey, people again fed back that they did not feel fully involved and were not sure they had been offered a copy of their care plan. We received similar feedback from people during our assessment. The registered manager told us that work was ongoing to promote a more person-centred approach, and we saw this reflected in care plans. Staff told us communication was much improved and they felt informed about people’s changing needs.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the needs of people living at the service. We observed good practice in supporting and understanding a person who was moving themselves around in a way that was appropriate to them at that time. Work was ongoing to build relationships with the local community. People were supported to attend a local social club and links with a local nursery and school had been formed with children coming to the service to engage with people. People were supported to make use of a local library service and had been supported to obtain bus passes to enable trips out locally.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

None of the people we spoke with who lived at the service had seen their care plans or felt involved in the care planning process. However, some family members did tell us they had been involved and found this helpful. The registered manager told us they were working with staff to make sure people were involved in care planning and in making daily records about their care and support.

The home used communication aids called Talking Tiles which people could press to listen to information about what was happening in the home. However, only one tile which was supposed to give details about activities, was in place and wasn’t working. Staff didn’t know why this was or where the other tiles were. The manager said they were working towards re-introducing the monthly newsletter which had previously been used to share information with people and relatives and had been a popular initiative.

Folders of 4 weekly menus were provided on dining tables, but they were not easy to read and it was not clear which weeks' meals in the rotation were currently being served.This was being addressed.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were given opportunities to have their say about the service. This included use of satisfaction surveys and regular meetings. Outcomes of both were analysed and actions put in place. For example, when people’s relatives had said they found it hard to attend meetings, the manager organised for them to be able to attend virtually. People and families were updated about actions taken in relation to feedback and reasons were provided if suggestions made could not be implemented. ‘You said, we did’ posters were developed to let people know what had been done as a result of their feedback and we saw these displayed around the service.

Complaints to the service were managed well and when people had said in a satisfaction survey that they were unsure how to make a complaint, this was addressed in a meeting. A relative told us about how staff had responded well when they raised an issue. Compliments about the new management team and improvements at the service had been received and shared with staff.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were supported to access care, support and treatment as they needed it. A single point of referral was used to make sure the request for support went to the right health or social care professional.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People were able to give their views about their care and there was no evidence of discrimination. We discussed with the management team about possible improvements to activity provision to make sure people were supported outside more regularly.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The registered manager had built working relationships with the community palliative care team and local hospice for support and training for staff. People’s preferences and decisions in relation to emergency care and treatment, including resuscitation were clearly documented. End of life care plans were in place, but these varied in quality and detail. The registered manager was addressing this.