Fairlight Manor

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We observed staff supporting people in a person-centred way. People’s care plans were person-centred, they reflected people as individuals, their interests and preferences. There was information about what people enjoyed doing and who was important to them. Care plans were regularly reviewed. Daily records demonstrated what people had been doing each day. Relatives and where they were able, people, were involved in the reviews to ensure they were current and contained the relevant information. One relative told us they were able to suggest changes to care plans to ensure these better reflected their loved one.

Staff used their knowledge of people to provide person-centred care. They understood how to support each person. They told us about one person who liked their own space and how they supported this person without them becoming isolated. They understood what may cause people to become distressed or anxious and how to prevent and support them at this time.One staff member said, “We are always giving people choices and helping them to make their own decisions. They have a choice of meals. Some people choose when to go to bed and get up. Some need support and others do it themselves.”

The provider spoke about their knowledge and expertise in dementia care. They said, “This enabled staff to use different techniques and approaches which are person centred to help people have a calm environment in which to live.” This was also mentioned by a relative who told us how their loved one had benefitted from the calm environment.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People’s relatives told us their loved ones were referred to relevant health and social care professionals when required. One relative said staff were, “Proactive” in contacting health professionals when required. People received support from a consistent staff team for continuity. Staff were regularly updated about changes in people’s care and support needs, and information was available to share with relevant health and social care professionals.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s relatives told us they were kept up to date about their loved one’s care, treatment and well-being. They told us they were involved in reviewing their loved one’s care plans. Communication plans were in place. These included information about how to communicate with each person. We observed staff involving people throughout the day and providing information in a way they could understand. There was a large activity planner which was pictorial and available for people to help make decisions and choices about what they wanted to do.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

There were regular resident meetings which relatives were able to attend. These meetings were chaired by people who were supported by staff. Relatives, and where they were able, people, were sent surveys to feedback on the service. Feedback received was positive. There were monthly newsletters and these included information about what was happening at the home, future events and staff changes. One relative told us there was information about a staff member being absent. They told us their loved one had a special bond with this staff member, and this information had enabled them to provide extra support during the time of the staff member’s absence.

Most relatives told us there was good communication between them and the home. One relative said, “Communication is good, it’s appropriate and they will call, when necessary, I can always email, and they will get back to me.” Another relative told us they would like to receive more detailed information about their loved one. Whilst retaining confidentiality, we discussed this with the provider who told us they would talk with relatives to ensure they were receiving the level of communication they wanted.

There was a complaints policy and complaints received were responded to appropriately and used to improve and develop the home.

The provider had introduced staff recognition awards. As well as staff, people and their relatives were encouraged to nominate a staff member for an award. This helped to ensure people were involved in all aspects of the day to day running of the home.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Systems were in place to help ensure people were not prevented from receiving the care and support they needed due to their health or disability. Staff told us they worked with external professionals to help ensure people received the relevant health and social care support they required.The home had been adapted to ensure it met people’s needs. There was a passenger lift that allowed level access throughout the home. There was level access to the garden with a series of pathways, areas of interest and seating areas which people were seen to use. There was a series of buildings at the end of the garden. This included a garden / activity room. This was always open to people with seating areas. These buildings had been decorated externally to create a village feel. For example, there was a ‘laundrette’ a ‘café’ and ‘cake shop.’ The cake shop was the provider’s office and people had access to all areas. The provider explained that if people visited the office believing it was a cake shop then they would be given a seat and offered a cake.

Throughout the home and garden, the provider had introduced a ‘Blue Plaque’ system. These were designed as conversation starters and included questions for people. For example, ‘Why do people like flowers.’ These acted as a talking point and prompted people to discuss with each other.

Within the home, bedroom doors had been decorated as traditional front doors and were each a different colour. This helped people identify their own rooms. There were yellow strips on the stair treads to help people safely identify where to step. There were separate seating areas within the lounge area. One relative told us, “I really like that the chairs are arranged in a cosier type of setting. They’re not all around the edge of the room.” This enabled people to sit with friendship groups and enjoy time together.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff were aware of the importance of ensuring people were not subject to inequality or discrimination due to their age or health needs. They supported people to receive the appropriate care and treatment by building effective relationships with people, their families and health and social care professionals.Staff understood how to speak with people to support their specific needs and knew the best way to enable people to participate in decisions about their experience of care. One staff member said, “We are guided by people. We do what they want us to do, not the other way round.”

There was a visiting hairdresser at the home. However, the provider explained, that as far as possible, people were encouraged to visit their own hairdresser. The provider explained that it was important for people, who were able, to still go out. It was equally important for the public to acknowledge people in their community were living with dementia.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Some people had ReSPECT forms in place (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment). These included whether or not the person wished to be resuscitated in the event of a cardiac arrest. People and their families were involved in these decisions. Where people were less able to express their choices and did not have family or friends involved in their lives, staff used their knowledge of people to help develop a plan.

Some people and / or their families did not wish to discuss their preferences about the care they may like to receive towards the end of their lives. These wishes were respected if they chose not to discuss this aspect of their care.One staff member told us, “We like to discuss end of life care pre-admission, including funeral plans and religious wishes. This takes the crisis away, it gives people and families an opportunity to think about it and make decisions.”