You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

We carried out this inspection on 1 and 2 November 2017. This inspection was announced, which meant the provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our inspection visit. This was because the location provides a small domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to meet with us.

We checked progress the registered provider had made following our inspection on 27 October 2016 when we found a breach of Regulation 13 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, Safeguarding service users from abuse and improper treatment. This was because the registered manager had not ensured the systems and processes in place were operated effectively to ensure people were protected from abuse and improper treatment.

Following the last inspection, we asked the registered provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question of safe to at least good. We found improvements had been made in this area and the service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.

People using the service lived in flats within a purpose built building on the outskirts of Sheffield. Not everyone living at Fairthorn received support with personal care; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of this inspection seven people were provided with ‘personal care.’

There was a manager at the service who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

People told us they felt safe living at Fairthorn, “I feel very safe indeed, because of the care I get. I really feel cosseted with kindness and their expertise they seem to have deep understanding of our needs.”

All staff we spoke with understood what it meant to protect people from abuse and what actions to take if they suspected someone was being abused.

There were enough staff available to ensure people’s needs were met. The service had robust recruitment procedures to make sure staff had the required skills and were of suitable character and background.

Procedures were in place to make sure people received their medicines as prescribed.

People were supported by staff who had the knowledge and skills necessary to carry out their roles in meeting people’s needs. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and annual appraisals.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were supported to access health and social care professionals to help maintain their health and wellbeing.

Positive and supportive relationships had been developed between staff and people living at Fairthorn. We saw people were treated with dignity and respect.

There was a range of activities available to people living at Fairthorn.

People received personalised care. Care records reflected people’s current needs and preferences. Care records contained up to date risk assessments and these were reviewed regularly.

The

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

The service was safe.

There were up to date policies and procedures in place for staff to recognise and respond to any allegations of abuse. Staff had received training in this area and understood how to keep people safe.

Staffing levels were appropriate to meet the needs of people who used the service, and safe recruitment procedures were followed to make sure staff were of suitable character and background.

We found systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the knowledge and skills necessary to carry out their roles in meeting people�s needs. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives.

People were encouraged and supported to eat regular and balanced meals, where appropriate.

Caring

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

The service was caring.

People and their relatives told us the staff were kind and caring.

Staff knew what it meant to treat people with dignity and respect, and we saw people had their privacy and dignity respected by staff at all times throughout the inspection.

Staff knew people�s preferences and were keen to support people to be as independent as possible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

The service was responsive.

There was a range of activities available to people to join in if they wanted to.

There was a comprehensive complaints and compliments policy and procedure. Feedback on the service was encouraged and responded to.

People�s care records were up to date and regularly reviewed. This meant they reflected the person�s current health and social care needs.

Well-led

Good

Updated 28 December 2017

The service was well-led.

People, their relatives and staff told us the registered manager was supportive and approachable.

People living at Fairthorn and the staff were regularly asked for their views. We saw any concerns and suggestions were considered and acted upon.

The service had quality assurance systems in place, and up to date policies and procedures which reflected current legislation and good practice guidance.