We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fairhaven 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 Fairhaven, you can give feedback on this service.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At the inspection we found that the provider was in breach of Regulation 9 of the Care Quality Commission (Regulated Activity) Regulations 2014. This was because care plans contained incomplete information. There were no clear guidelines regarding behaviours that could be challenging to other people and staff. Following the inspection, the provider sent us an action plan to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach. At this inspection we saw that the provider had followed their plan and had met legal requirements. We found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The service had a positive culture that was person-centred, open and inclusive. There was a strong emphasis on putting people first. People were involved in the service within their capabilities. People assisted with meal preparation with staff support. Everyone spoke highly regarding the staff. 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 support this practice.
The service had a registered manager in place. It was well led, and the registered manager was aware of their legal responsibilities.
Staff were enthusiastic and keen to talk about their role. Staff were proud of the service and their work. They felt supported within their roles and held the registered manager in high regard. Recruitment practices were robust, and staff received training appropriate to their role and the needs of the people living at the service.
People had comprehensive plans of care and risk assessments. Care was individualised and person centred.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Fairhaven is a residential care home, which provides care and support for up to 13 people with a variety of mental health needs. At the time of our inspection there were eight people living at the service.
Fairhaven is a terraced three storey home. All bedrooms were single occupancy. There is a communal lounge, kitchen, separate dining room and a garden, which includes a designated smoking area.
The service has 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 is run. The registered manager was not available on the day of our inspection.
Some people's individual care records did not accurately reflect their needs or were incomplete. This meant that it was not always possible to be clear if a person was supported in the right way.
People told us they felt safe with the home’s staff. There were policies and procedures regarding the safeguarding of adults and staff knew what action to take if they thought anyone was at risk of potential harm.
Risk assessments were in place to protect people from any identified risks and help keep them safe. There were also risk assessments in place to help keep people safe in the event of an unforeseen emergency such as fire or flood.
Thorough recruitment processes were in place for newly appointed staff to check they were suitable to work with people. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs safely. People told us there were enough staff on duty and records and staff confirmed this.
People were supported to take their medicines as directed by their GP. Records showed that medicines were obtained, stored, administered and disposed of safely.
The CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. Whilst no-one living at the home was currently subject to DoLS, the deputy manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one. The provider was meeting the requirements of DoLS. There were no restrictions imposed on people and they were able to make individual decisions for themselves. The deputy manager and staff were guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) regarding best interests decisions should anyone be deemed to lack capacity.
Staff received training to help them meet people’s needs. Staff received an induction and regular supervision including monitoring of their performance. Staff were supported to develop their skills through additional training such as National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) or care diplomas. All staff completed an induction before working unsupervised. People were well supported and said staff were knowledgeable about their care needs.
People told us the food at the home was good and they were offered a choice at mealtimes.
People’s privacy and dignity were respected. Staff had a caring attitude towards people. We saw staff smiling and laughing with people and offering support. There was a good rapport between people and staff.
People were involved as much as possible in planning their care. The deputy manager and staff were flexible and responsive to people's individual preferences and ensured people were supported in accordance with their needs and abilities. People were encouraged to maintain their independence and to participate in activities that interested them.
The deputy manager told us the registered manager operated an open door policy and welcomed feedback on any aspect of the service. The registered manager and deputy manager monitored the delivery of care.
There was a stable staff team who said that communication in the home was good and they always felt able to make suggestions. They confirmed management were open and approachable.
A system of audits were in place to measure and monitor the quality of the service provided and this helped to ensure care was delivered consistently. Suggestions on improvements to the service were welcomed and people’s feedback was encouraged.
There was a clear complaints policy and people knew how to make a complaint if necessary.
During this inspection, we found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, discussions with three people using the service, three staff supporting them and from looking at records. Records that we looked at included people's assessments and care plans, staff recruitment files and quality monitoring records that related to the management of the service.
If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. On the day of our inspection we were informed that no one who lived at the service was subject to a DoLS authorisation. However, relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made to deprive someone of their liberty and how to submit one. Staff that we spoke with demonstrated knowledge of their responsibilities in respect of this.
There were systems in place to make sure that the manager and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents. This helped reduce the risk of harm to people and reduced such incidents in the future.
We looked at the recruitment processes and found them to be safe and thorough. The service had carried out relevant checks to ensure that staff had the necessary skills and aptitudes to work with people living at Fairhaven.
Is the service effective?
People told us that they were happy with the support they received and their needs had been met. One person told us, 'Keyworkers help us with things like getting stuff for your room and making appointments. I wear dentures and need more glue. My keyworker will help me get this'. Another person said, 'I'm very happy here. The place I was living before was not up to my standard'.
It was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.
We found that care plans provided up-to-date information about people's care needs and preferences. This meant that people were sure that their individual care needs and wishes were known and planned for. We found that people's needs were assessed and monitored effectively.
People were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. When we spoke to people about their views on the meals provided they expressed satisfaction. For example, one person told us, 'We have monthly meetings and decide what meals are on the menu'. Another said, 'I am trying to lose weight and the staff are helping me'.
The service had good systems in place for sharing information with other agencies. These helped ensure that people received the care and treatment they needed if they needed to visit a hospital or receive treatment from other professionals. People told us that they were happy with the support they received to access other health and social care services.
Is the service caring?
People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People that we spoke with confirmed this. One person told us, 'I have meetings with my keyworker. We talk about how I am feeling. I can go to any of the staff if I am upset or have problems. They talk to me and try and help me'.
Is the service responsive?
Where staff identified a concern about people's diet the service made sure appropriate referrals to other professionals were made and support was given. This meant that people were supported to maintain and manage changes in their health.
The service worked with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.
Is the service well-led?
We saw there were systems for monitoring the quality of services provided. Since our last inspection a new manager has been registered with us. The manager was not present on the day of our inspection; however evidence gained during our visit demonstrated that the manager was committed to making improvements to the quality of service provided to people.
We spoke with three people who lived at the home. All were happy living there and had no complaints to make about the care they received. One person told us, "I've lived in a few places and this is the best one.". Another told us," I like it here. I feel safe". They were pleased with how staff treated them and the extensive range of activities on offer.
We spoke with three members of staff. They told us that they were happy working at Fairview and were respected as team members. One staff member said "We get more than enough training and get time to spend with the people we are caring for".
People also expressed satisfaction with the staff who worked at the service. For example, one person said, 'The staff treat me very fair. They take me out in the car because they know it's important to me'.
Another person said, 'The staff are alright here. You can do what you want more or less. They encourage you to do things but you still have rules such as where you can smoke'.
Two of the three people that we spoke with confirmed they had a key worker and that they supported them with their care needs. Two of the three people said that they did not have one to one meetings to discuss their needs. For example, one person said, 'We have house meetings and talk about activities and things. I don't have one to one meetings to talk about my care'. Another person said, 'My key worker did a new plan for me on his own. We didn't have a meeting but he did ask if I was happy when he had done it'.
We spoke to three staff employed at the service. They all said that giving choices to people and supporting people to become independent were important elements of their jobs. For example, one person said, 'All the time we ask people for their views, encourage making choices and expressing preferences. It's our job to give people information and encourage good choices. We can't force people. If people make choices that place them at high risk we discuss and involve outside agencies'.