Archived: FairHaven

The service is registered to provide care and support to people with a learning disability. It currently provides care to three people who live at Fairhaven, in Derbyshire.

There was a registered manager 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.’

People were safe at Fairhaven. They were protected from harm and abuse by skilled and knowledgeable staff who understood their responsibility to keep people safe. Risks to people were identified and managed whilst individual choice and independence was respected. There were sufficient staff to meet the individual needs of people and staff were recruited safely to ensure their suitability to care for people. Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely which helped to ensure that people were protected from the risks associated with unsafe management of medicines.

Staff had the knowledge, skills and training to carry out their roles and care for people effectively. New staff received a robust induction into the service that equipped them with the knowledge and skills to care for people. Staff were supported and supervised by an experienced registered manager who supported their individual personal development. Staff understood and followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were in place where required. Consent was sought and people’s capacity was considered when decisions needed to be made about a person’s care in their best interests. People enjoyed the food provided and they were involved in developing menus, shopping for food and their personal preferences were catered for. People were supported to maintain good health by supporting their access to healthcare services and by making appropriate referrals.

People were cared for by staff who were kind, compassionate and enjoyed their jobs. We observed positive, natural interactions between staff and people who used the service and there was a genuine interest in people and their daily activities. People were involved in planning their care and in decisions about their daily life. They were treated with respect and dignity by staff who also promoted their independence and respected their rights.

People received individualised care that met their individual needs and preferences. People were included in discussions about their care and their views and wishes were respected and recorded in their care plans. Staff clearly knew people well including their individual preferences and aspirations; and they provided timely care and support to people in ways that respected their individuality. People were supported to follow their social and lifestyle interests and to access related activities. Relationships with family and friends were encouraged and supported by the staff team. The service sought feedback about people’s care experience and used it to improve the service and the quality of care people received. Incidents were reported and investigated and complaints were managed and responded to appropriately.

There was a positive, inclusive and empowering culture within the service where people and staff felt valued. There was visible leadership and management from the registered manager who was part of the team. Staff felt supported and motivated by the registered manager and everyone was keen to provide a high quality service for people. The registered manager was supported by the provider who provided overall governance of the service. The management and governance arrangements helped to ensure the quality and safety of people’s care at the service.

We last inspected this service on 24 October 2013. At that time we found that the protocols for medicines people received only when required were not being fully completed. At this inspection we found the provider had addressed this and records for all medicines people received were fully recorded. A summary of what we found is set out below.

We used the evidence we collected during our inspection to answer five questions.

Is the service safe?

We asked care staff about the systems in place to protect people who received care from abuse or neglect. Care staff told us they would have no hesitation in raising any concerns they had. They said the culture in the home was open and they could discuss anything with the manager and other staff.

The policies and procedures for providing people with their medicines were clear. Care staff were able to monitor all the medicines people received to identify side effects and any reactions. This meant people were protected from the risks of medicines being managed unsafely. Medicines were checked regularly and staff's competency in handling medicines was reviewed.

There were no Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in place. The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards are a legal framework designed to ensure that the care people receive does not unlawfully deprive them of their liberty.

Is the service effective?

Peoples, needs were assessed and care plans were reviewed monthly. Care staff reviewed the support provided and identified if any changes to care plans were needed. Risk assessments had been carried out and were reviewed regularly. Care staff were able to access advice from professionals employed by the provider for example about people's behaviour. Care staff had the appropriate training and experience to enable them to carry out their role effectively. Care staff told us they received regular supervision and appraisal. Care staff training was up to date.

Is the service caring?

We spoke with all three people who used the service. They said care staff treated them well. One person told us they had attended one of the care staff 's wedding. They said, 'It was like being part of the family.' Another person said, 'Staff really look after us well.".

We observed care staff providing support for people. We saw they had a good rapport with people. Care staff told us they had noticed a change in one person's behaviour. They said they were concerned to understand what might have caused this. They had asked for advice from someone who specialised in providing advice to the service on behavioural issues.

Is the service responsive?

At the time of our visit one person had been unwell. Care staff had organised diagnostic tests and obtained advice from the GP surgery. The person had stayed at home rather than attending the day centre. The person told us they felt better.

Care records showed people receive annual health checks and visited the dentist and opticians regularly. One person was anxious about visiting the dentist and care staff had organised medication they could give the person to reduce their anxiety.

We saw care staff were concerned about one person's mobility and had requested an assessment for a wheelchair.

Is the service well-led?

The manager and care staff monitored the quality of the service by regularly reviewing medicines, infection control and the safety of equipment. Incidents were reported to the provider's health and safety lead who provided advice on any action the manager was required to take. The provider also visited the home to check care staff were following their policies and achieving their standards for the care provided.

We spoke with one person about their experiences of living at Fairhaven and they told us they liked living there. They said, 'The staff are friendly and I am very comfortable here.' They also told us they were attending a social group at a day centre in Chesterfield, which was run by the provider.

We saw that this person was very relaxed in the home and also with the staff. They showed us their bedroom and spoke with pride about their room and their possessions.

Two staff we spoke with said they really enjoyed working at the home and told us about how they supported the people who lived there to be involved in their local community.

We found that people received care and support that protected their rights and met their needs from staff that were properly trained and supported.

One person told us 'this is my home and I really like it here.' They also told us they felt safe at the service. .

We saw that people's needs were assessed, and support plans were in place. This meant they received support in a way they prefer.

A family member told us "staff are wonderful and caring. I am pleased with how the placement is going. ' They felt their relative was safe at the service and happy.

Care records demonstrated that staff were committed to promoting independence and involving individuals in decisions on a day to day basis.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, and make improvements where required.