Archived: Fairdene Lodge

People’s experience of using this service:

The provider had not ensured that we were notified of all safeguarding incidents and when people had been deprived of their liberty, which they are required by law to do.

The quality assurance system had not identified all areas for improvement. However, the provider had recognised that improvements to this system were needed and were in the process of changing to a new system.

People and their relatives told us they were safe and well looked after. Staff understood how to identify and report any concerns about people’s safety. Risks to people were considered and appropriate measures put in place to reduce risks.

People were treated with kindness and compassion and their emotional needs were met. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and encourage independence.

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 did not always support recording of this practice. When other people held legal powers to make decisions on behalf of people, this was known by staff.

The home had been redecorated to meet the needs of people living with dementia. This included signs to help people move independently around the home. Staff had worked with dementia specialists to consider the decoration and design of the home.

People’s medicines were managed safely. People’s health care needs were supported, and staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to ensure people received the right support. The home was kept clean and tidy and staff understood how to prevent the spread of infection.

People enjoyed the food on offer and mealtimes were social occasions. People also spent time pursuing activities both in and outside the home. People’s interests and life histories helped staff identify activities and outings they would enjoy.

People were assessed before moving into the home, and their relatives were included as appropriate. Care plans included information on what people liked to do, and their histories, as well as information about how to keep them safe and well.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good. (1 March 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection.

Enforcement: There was a breach of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. Please see the 'action we have told the provider to take' section towards the end of the report.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about this service and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule.

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 people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People also said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed. A relative told us, “I’ve never raised any concerns, but I would complain to the manager”.

Staff were asked for their opinions on the service and whether they were happy in their work. They felt supported within their roles, describing an ‘open door’ management approach, where managers were always available to discuss suggestions and address problems or concerns. The provider undertook quality assurance reviews to measure and monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement.

During our visit to Fairdene Lodge we spoke with people who lived at the service and staff members. The people we spoke to told us they were happy with the care they received. One person told us "the staff here are lovely," another person told us "I enjoy the food and they are very kind here."

Our visit was facilitated by the manager who had submitted an application to be the registered manager for the home. We looked at supporting care documentation and staff documentation. We saw that people's care needs had been assessed and that care had been planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

Thirty-one people were resident at the time of our visit. We saw that people's care was supported by workers who understood the care needs of the people living at Fairdene Lodge and that those workers had received the training required for them to carry out the duties of their role.

We spoke with five people individually who used the service and a number of other people who were sitting in communal areas. We spoke with three members of staff individually. One staff member told us "It is a happy place to work with good communication and we can give good care."