You are here


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fairfield Nursing Home on 9 September 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Fairfield Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 4 October 2017

During a routine inspection

This unannounced inspection took place on 4 October 2017.

Fairfield Nursing Home is a nursing home registered for up to 29 people. The home is a detached property set in its own grounds in a quiet residential area. At the last inspection in October 2015 we found that the home was providing a good service in all areas. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The home provided a comfortable, safe and well-maintained environment for people to live in. People’s medicines were managed safely.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. New staff were recruited safely and all staff received regular training relevant to their work.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The service worked within the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.

Everyone we spoke with was happy with the meals provided. The meals were presented well and people received the support they required with their meal. People we spoke with said how kind, considerate and polite all members of staff were.

People's care and support needs were assessed and plans put in place for how their needs should be met. These were individualised and covered all aspects of a person's needs including physical, mental health and social needs.

The home's complaints procedure was displayed in the entrance area and provided details about how, and to whom, complaints should be addressed. The manager maintained detailed complaints records.

The home had a manager who was registered with CQC. People told us that the manager was approachable and they considered her a good leader. We saw that people had completed satisfaction surveys. Auditing systems were used to monitor the quality and effectiveness of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection carried out on 8th and 12th October 2015

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of Fairfield Nursing Home on 8th and 12th October 2015. Fairfield Nursing Home provides residential and nursing care for up to 29 people with varying needs. These include specialist nursing support, respite care, end of life care and general assistance with everyday living for people with dementia.

The home is situated in a quiet residential area of Heswall on the Wirral offering single accommodation of a good standard. Each floor has a communal bathroom. On the ground floor there is a communal lounge, dining area and are awaiting planning permission for conservatory adaptions and improvements.

The home required 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. There was a registered manager in post, who registered with the Care Quality Commission in May 2015.

People who lived at the home were happy there and held the staff in high regard. They said they were well looked after. People told us they felt safe at the home and had no worries or concerns. From our observations it was clear that staff cared for the people they looked after and knew them well. The staff we observed and spoke with clearly understood the needs of the people they were supporting and were skilled and trained to provide support to them.

People had access to sufficient quantities of nutritious food and drink throughout the day and were given suitable menu choices at each mealtime. All medication records were legibly

and properly completed. All staff giving out medication had been medication trained.

We reviewed ten care plans, these provided sufficient information on people’s needs and risks and provided guidance to staff on how to meet them. Regular reviews of care plans took place to monitor any changes to the support people required.

We saw that the home had ensured people’s mental health needs had been assessed and had employed elements of good practice in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We also saw that that 8 staff out of 37 had attended Mental Capacity training, this was mainly senior staff.

Some of the communal areas in the home were being re-modelled and planning permission had been requested for improvements to the conservatory that was tired and shabby. There is a small outside garden with seating facilities which also housed bird tables and bird feeding stations, for the people to enjoy.

We spoke to ten people who use the service, seven relatives and friends and seven staff. The staff we spoke to included nursing, care and ancillary staff.

People and relatives we spoke with said they would know how to make a complaint. No-one we spoke with had any complaints.

The provider had systems in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of harm or abuse. We saw there were policies and procedures in place to guide staff in relation to safeguarding adults.

We found that good recruitment practices were in place which included the completion of pre-employment checks prior to a new member of staff working at the service. Staff received regular training to enable them to work safely and effectively.

People and staff told us that the home was well led and the staff told us that they felt well supported in their roles. We saw that the manager was a visible presence in and about the home and it was obvious that they knew the people who lived in the home extremely well and that the staff were well supported to carry out their responsibilities.

Inspection carried out on 14 May 2013

During a routine inspection

People living in the home or those close to them were involved with planning of their care so that the individual remained in control.

We found that people's needs were assessed before they moved to the home. Plans to support them were regularly reviewed to ensure their care needs were met. A relative described the staff as wonderful, kind and caring and their relative as being very settled living in the home. One person described the care as second to none.

Medicines were administered by qualified nurses so that people living in the home received medicines safely.

We found that the bathroom flooring identified at our last visit had been replaced and communal areas in the home were undergoing some decoration.

Staff told us that they receive support and training to enable them to do their job. We found that a training plan had been developed to ensure staff knowledge was current.

Inspection carried out on 8 August 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with three people who use the service and two relatives. They all told us they were very happy with the home. People told us the staff were always respectful and very helpful. The relatives we spoke with said they had never had any concerns or issues about the care received. All the people we spoke with said they felt safe at the home.

People told us their rooms were comfortable and regularly cleaned. Although the people receiving the services were happy with the home we found that there were failures in maintaining the bathrooms in the home. There was only one shower working in the home which was insufficient to meet the needs for up to 29 people.