You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 2 March 2016

We inspected Fairdene Lodge on the 26 January 2016. Fairdene Lodge is a care home registered to provide support for older people who may have dementia and require personal care. The home is registered to support a maximum of thirty-two service users. The home is located in Hove, East Sussex in a residential area. There were 30 people living at the service on the day of our inspections. Fairdene Lodge was previously inspected on 18 October 2013 and no concerns were identified.

A registered manager was in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were happy and relaxed with staff. They said they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to support them. One person told us, “I think we are all safe here, we are very happy”. When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked and references obtained. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding adults and what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place.

Medicines were managed safely and in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.

People were being supported to make decisions in their best interests. The registered manager and staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately and steps taken to minimise the risk of similar events happening in the future. Risks associated with the environment and equipment had been identified and managed. Emergency procedures were in place in the event of fire and people knew what to do, as did the staff.

Staff had received essential training and there were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, including the care of people with dementia and managing behaviour that may challenge others. Staff had received both one-to-one and group supervision meetings with their manager, and formal personal development plans, such as annual appraisals were in place. One member of staff told us, “We discuss training at supervision and in appraisal. The manager always encourages us to go on courses, and then asks us what they were like, what did we learn and what learning we can share with others”.

People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink well. There was a varied daily choice of meals and people were able to give feedback and have choice in what they ate and drank. One person told us, “The food is nice, there’s lots of choice”. Special dietary requirements were met, and people’s weight was monitored, with their permission. Health care was accessible for people and appointments were made for regular check-ups as needed.

People chose how to spend their day and they took part in activities in the service and the community. People told us they enjoyed the activities, which included quizzes, singing, exercises, films, arts and crafts and themed events, such as reminiscence sessions. One person told us, “I don’t get bored, there’s plenty to do. We have a laugh”. People were also encouraged to stay in touch with their families and receive visitors.

People felt well looked after and supported. We observed friendly and genuine relationships had developed between people and staff. One person told us, “The staff are very caring and nice”. Care plans described people’s needs and preferences and they were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

People were encouraged to express their views and had completed surveys. Feedback received showed peo

Inspection areas



Updated 2 March 2016

The service was safe.

Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to protecting people from harm and abuse.

Potential risks were identified, appropriately assessed and planned for. Medicines were managed and administered safely.

The provider used safe recruitment practices and there were enough skilled and experienced staff to ensure people were safe and cared for.



Updated 2 March 2016

The service was effective.

People spoke highly of staff members and were supported by staff who received appropriate training and supervision.

People were supported to maintain their hydration and nutritional needs. Their health was monitored and staff responded when health needs changed.

Staff had a firm understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.



Updated 2 March 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported by kind and caring staff.

People were involved in the planning of their care and offered choices in relation to their care and treatment.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected and their independence was promoted.



Updated 2 March 2016

The service was responsive.

Care plans accurately recorded people’s likes, dislikes and preferences. Staff had information that enabled them to provide support in line with people’s wishes.

People were supported to take part in meaningful activities. They were supported to maintain relationships with people important to them.

There was a system in place to manage complaints and comments. People felt able to make a complaint and were confident they would be listened to and acted on.



Updated 2 March 2016

The service was well-led.

People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the registered manager. The provider promoted an inclusive and open culture and recognised the importance of effective communication.

There were effective systems in place to assure quality and identify any potential improvements to the service being provided.

Forums were in place to gain feedback from staff and people. Feedback was regularly used to drive improvement.