Archived: Fenwick

Updated 25 July 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We undertook a first comprehensive inspection of the service in line with the CQC registration requirements of a new service. There had been a change in the legal entity of the provider on 13 April 2017. This resulted in the changes to the provider’s registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Despite these changes, the service remained the same as when it was last inspected in terms of the people using the service and the staff providing care.

This unannounced inspection took place on 14 June 2018. The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an inspection manager.

Prior to carrying out this inspection we asked the provider to complete a provider information return (PIR). This is a form which asks providers to tell us what they think the service is doing well and their plans to improve the service. We also reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. Statutory notifications include information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We used this information to plan the inspection.

During the inspection, we undertook general observations and formal observations of how staff treated and supported people throughout the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

During the inspection, we spoke with two members of care staff and the registered manager. We reviewed two people's care records. We looked at four staff files including recruitment, training, supervision, appraisal records and duty rotas. We looked at quality assurance reports and reports related to the management of the service that included complaints, incidents and accidents and team meeting minutes.

After the inspection, we spoke with three relatives of people using the service. We also received feedback from two health and social care professionals who were involved in people’s care.

Updated 25 July 2018

This inspection took place on 14 June 2018 and was unannounced.

Fenwick is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Fenwick provides accommodation and support to up to three people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection three people were using the service.

The building comprises three bedrooms, lounge, kitchen and dining area. The laundry was outside and there was a rear garden. One bedroom had en-suite facilities of a bath and toilet. There was a communal bathroom and toilet.

There was a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

Parts of the building required repairs and maintenance. People were protected from the risk of harm. Staff understood the safeguarding procedures on identifying and reporting abuse. People received care that minimised harm from known risks. Risk assessments and management plans were reviewed and updated to ensure staff provided care in a safe manner. Staff managed incidents in an appropriate manner and learnt from them to prevent a recurrence.

People were supported by a sufficient number of skilled and experienced staff. Staffing levels were adequate to meet people’s needs in a safe manner. People received care from staff who had undergone appropriate recruitment procedures to ensure their suitability to provide support. People’s medicines were administered and managed safely. Staff knew how to minimise the risk of infection and a recurrence of incidents and accidents.

People underwent an assessment of their needs before they started using the service. Health and social care professionals were involved in planning people’s care delivery which ensured that support provided met best practice guidance. Staff felt supported in their roles and in addition received training and supervision. People received care in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff obtained people’s consent to care and support and made decisions in each person’s best interests when they were unable to do so. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity. People were supported to maintain relationships that mattered to them. People enjoyed taking part in a variety of activities at the service and in the community.

People’s care plans underwent reviews to ensure they remained appropriate to meet their needs. Staff responded to changes in people’s health and well-being and involved health and social care professionals in a timely manner. The provider ensured people had information in line with the Accessible Information Standards.

People had access to healthcare services and were supported to maintain good health. People received food that met their preferences, dietary and cultural needs.

People using the service and their relatives had opportunities to share their views about the quality of care delivery. The registered manager acted on the feedback to develop the service.

People’s care delivery was checked and audited to identify any shortfalls. Improvements to the service were made to address gaps identified. The provider carried out quality assurance checks and surveys to develop the service.

The registered manager worked in close partnership with other agencies to ensure that people received appropriate and effective care.

We have made a recommendation on the management of the premises.