We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fairmont Residential Home on 6 July 2023. 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 Fairmont Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Fairmont Residential home is a residential care home providing personal care to 23 older people, people with a physical disability, sensory impairment, younger adults and people living with a dementia. Eighteen people were living at the service at the time of the inspection. The service was one building over three floors. Bedrooms benefited from ensuite facilities some of which included showers. Public areas were accessible to all people with lift access. Outside accessible space was available to people as well as car parking onsite.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We have made recommendations about managing risks, post falls observations and staff recruitment processes. Risks were being managed, however; further detail was required to ensure risk assessments contained up to date information about how to support people’s individual needs. The registered manager told us they would ensure observation of people would take place where falls had occurred. The registered manager confirmed the actions they would take which ensured the employment history of staff was available to them and considered as part of the recruitment process. Sufficient numbers of staff were in place to support people’s needs. People told us they felt safe and staff understood how to act on allegations of abuse.
People’s health needs were supported with a range of professionals involved. Supplies of food was available for meal preparation and choices of meals were offered. Staff received relevant training to support the delivery of care, supervisions and appraisals were undertaken. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People received good care and their individual needs were met. People were treated with dignity and their privacy was considered. Good, kind and caring interactions were noted between staff and people.
A range of activities were provided to people. We observed activities taking place during the inspection. A computerised system had been introduced since the last inspection. The registered manager took action to ensure records contained up to date information about how to support people’s individual needs. Systems were in place to deal with complaints.
People were complimentary about the registered manager and the support she provided. The registered manager and staff team were open and transparent during the inspection. The provider visited the service regularly and clearly knew the staff team and people living in the service. Audits and monitoring of the service was ongoing.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (Published 28 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
We issued two requirement notices and asked the registered provider to tell us how they were going to make the improvements required. At this inspection we found that the registered provider and registered manager had made the changes and improvements needed to meet the requirement notices from the previous inspection.
Fairmont Residential Home is located in the district of Fulwood, Preston. The home is a purpose built three storey residence that provides personal care and accommodation for adults with physical disability, mental health needs as well as people loving with dementia and/or associated social care needs. The home is registered for 23 people and at the time of our inspection there were 22 people living at Fairmont.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 and associated Regulations about how the service was run.
The registered manager was not at the home when we arrived as it was her day off. However as there was a social event on at the home they came in to support people and staff. We found the registered manager, registered provider and the staff team to be cooperative throughout the inspection process. We gave formal written feedback to the registered manager and registered provider prior to leaving the home.
People living at Fairmont told us that they felt safe and that staff knew their needs and preferences.
We had no concerns regarding the safety of the environment or fire procedures and people had their own personal evacuation plans in place.
Staff had signed to state they had read the homes safeguarding policies and procedures. When we spoke with staff we found them to be competent and confident in recognising potential safeguarding issues, as well as knowing how to report such issues if they arose.
People told us they received their medicines on time and we observed medicines being administered in line with the homes procedures. We saw that staff responsible for administering medicines received appropriate training and their competency was checked.
We also saw good evidence that staff had regular supervision and were able to raise issues with their manager.
We saw that procedures were in place for assessing a person’s decision making capacity. This helped to make sure that any decisions that needed to be taken on a person’s behalf were made in their best interests.
People were encouraged to contribute to the design of their own care and support. We found care plans to be person centred and focused around each person’s needs and wishes.
People’s care plans contained a ‘preferred priorities of care’ document which was completed with people to plan in advance, their wishes for their care and support, including end of life care.
We saw evidence of a wide range of meaningful and appropriate activities taking place both within and external to the home.
We saw that a wide range of audits were carried out at the home that helped inform and improve service delivery. In addition to audits, quality checks were carried out by the register manager and home owners on an at least monthly basis.
The home was operating in line with its regulatory duties including the submission of notifications and display of the latest Care Quality Commission rating.
This inspection took place on 20 May 2015 and was unannounced.
The last inspection of Fairmont Care Home took place on 25 April 2013. At that time we found that the provider was fully compliant with all the regulations assessed.
Fairmont Residential Home is located in the district of Fulwood, Preston. The home is a purpose built three storey residence that provides personal care and accommodation for adults with physical disability, mental health needs, people living with dementia and/or associated social care needs.
The registered manager was on duty on our arrival and received feedback throughout the inspection. 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.
We found that the service provided a good standard of person centred care. Feedback from people who used the service was positive in regards to being involved in plans around their care and support from staff. People told us that they felt safe and well cared for.
We looked at care records and found that staff worked positively with community professionals such as mental health workers to ensure that people’s needs were met. Care plans had been completed with person centred detail and showed that people were encouraged to participate in the care planning process.
Records showed that mental capacity assessments were undertaken prior to making a decision on the person’s behalf. We found the manager and care workers had a reasonable knowledge about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and requested support from external professionals when consideration was required for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
We found the provider did not always protect people from environmental and fire hazards. A chair was seen to block a main fire exit and the laundry door was unlocked meaning people who used the service could have access to hazardous chemicals. We asked the manager to resolve the issue who responded immediately and took appropriate action.
We found that the provider did not have suitable arrangements in place to manage soiled waste. We have made a recommendation about this area.
We found that the environment was not adapted for people living with dementia and or visual impairment.
Staff were provided with a range of training to assist them in carrying out their roles.
We looked at recruitment processes and found that the provider did not always ensure that robust checks were undertaken prior to staff being appointed.
We found the manager had suitable quality assurance systems in place, however failed to record good practice examples that she undertook on a regular basis such as; staff support and development, meetings and linking with the community.
We looked at the way people living with dementia are engaged in meaningful activities and found this was an area requiring improvement. We have made a recommendation about this area.
People who lived at Fairmont Care Home and the staff team were complimentary about the management of the home and felt that if there were any concerns, these would be dealt with quickly.
We found the provider was in breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This related to safe care and treatment and premises and equipment.
We found that up to date care assessments and care plans were in place and these were followed in practice. A visiting district nurse told us the staff were co-operative and always implemented their care instructions fully and to a high standard.
We found that people had their nutritional needs assessed and monitored and that specialist advice and support was sought in response to identified risks.
People told us they were happy with the quality and variety of food provided. One person said, 'The food is lovely and they cater for my needs. I have a halal diet'.
Risk assessments and care plans relating to moving and handling and the use of specialist equipment were in place. Suitable equipment was available to meet people's needs.
People were cared for by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Effective recruitment and selection processes were in place.
There was an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive and to ensure the provision of safe and appropriate care at all times.
There was an effective complaints system available. One person said, 'I've never had a complaint but I would go to the manager if I had a problem'.
People living in Fairmont indicated they were happy living there. They told us they were 'very happy' and they could do most things they wanted. One person told us, 'This seemed the best option for me. I would like to live independently, but at the moment this isn't possible. I have to say the staff here are very good. I have everything I need and I get out and about with staff help'.
People told us staff were respectful to them and they were able to have their say in how they wanted to be helped. They were supported to do the things they wanted to do and had a key worker who gave them one to one support. They told us they could voice their opinions and make comments before any decisions were made regarding their care and support.
Several people told us how the staff helped them. One person told us 'They are very good, even during the night if you need help'. Another person told us 'I'm going home today. I've enjoyed staying here. The staff have been excellent. Everything I have needed they have seen to. I couldn't fault the care at all'.
We were told people could visit their doctor whenever they needed and had staff support to deal with longer term health related problems. People also told us they had activities they enjoyed doing, for example shopping, trips out and social events. There was a mini bus that was used to transport them where they wanted to go.
People told us staff treated them well and they had no cause for concern. They were confident to raise any concern they had. There were no rigid routines they had to follow. We found people were kept safe in the home and when they went out. They were represented in their best interests. They were cared for by staff that were trained well and were always available to support them all the time.
People living in the home thought the home was run very well. They told us they could discuss any issue at their meetings and ask for things they wanted. They said the home was well run. They said, 'Everyone knows what to do and we get the help we need'. And 'It's comfortable. I have everything I need.' 'We are always doing something, it's better than sitting around. We can choose what we want to do and when. I can't fault them at all. I would definitely stay again, even though I want to get home. The food is nice, no complaints.'