Archived: Fairview House

Updated 12 December 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. At our last inspection in May 2016 we rated this service as Good and on this inspection, we found the service remained Good.

Fairview House is a care home. People in homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

We used information we held about the service and the provider to assist us to plan the inspection. This included notifications the provider had sent to us about significant events at the service. We also used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We produced an inspection plan to assist us to conduct the inspection visit.

Some people who lived at the home had limited levels of verbal communication to be able to give us their feedback of the care they received. Therefore, we observed the interaction between people and the staff who supported them throughout the inspection visit. We spoke with two people who used the service and spoke with two relatives about their experience of the care that the people who used the service. We spoke with three staff and the registered manager.

We reviewed care plans for three people to check that they were accurate and up to date. We also looked at the systems the provider had in place to ensure the quality of the service was continuously monitored and reviewed to drive improvement.

Updated 12 December 2018

This was an unannounced inspection on 9 November 2018 carried out by one inspector. Fairview House provides respite care over night on a Thursday and for weekend breaks. The service has accommodation for up to six people; forty people currently use the service throughout the year for respite services.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

At our last inspection in May 2016 we rated this service as Good. At this inspection 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.

Fairview House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service remained safe. People were protected from the risks of abuse because the staff understood where harm may be caused and knew what action to take. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were assessed and plans were in place to monitor people and to assist them in a safe manner. People’s medicines were managed safely and staff had received training to help ensure people had their medicines when these were needed. The staff had been suitably recruited to ensure they could work with people. People felt there was enough staff to provide their support and the provider reviewed how the service was managed to ensure there were sufficient staff, any lessons could be learnt and improvements were made.

People continued to receive effective care. Staff were supported and trained to ensure that they had the skills to support people effectively. People receiving respite care had access to emergency health care facilities and the staff knew about any care and treatment that was being provided in their home. When people required assistance to eat and drink, the provider ensured that this was planned to meet their preferences and assessed need.

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. People made decisions about their care and staff helped them to understand the information they needed to make informed decisions. Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care. People were helped to make decisions which were in their best interests and there were no restrictions placed upon them.

The service remained caring. People liked the staff who supported them and had developed good relationships. Information was available to ensure people could make informed choices and understood information that was important to them. Staff understood how people communicated and they promoted different ways of communicating, including through sign language. People received respite care and continued to have relationships with people who were important to them.

The service remained responsive. People’s care was reviewed at each period of respite care to ensure it reflected any changing support needs. People received support from staff to enable them to be involved with activities and do the things they enjoyed. People and their relatives were encouraged and supported to express their views about the care and support provided and staff were responsive to their comments and any concerns.

The service remained well led. The registered manager assessed and monitored the quality of care to ensure standards were met and maintained. Staff felt supported and people knew who the manager was. They understood the requirements of their registration with us and informed us of information that we needed to know.