• Care Home
  • Care home

Fairmile Grange

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Royal Close, Christchurch, Dorset, BH23 2FR (01202) 007569

Provided and run by:
Christchurch Fairmile Village LLP

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 30 March 2021

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 22 March 2021 and was announced.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 30 March 2021

About the service:

Fairmile Grange is a residential care home that was providing nursing and personal care to 50 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People and their families consistently described the care as safe. Staff had been trained to recognise and report any suspected abuse, discrimination or poor practice. Records showed us when potential concerns had been identified they had been reported appropriately to the relevant agencies. People had their risks assessed, monitored and reviewed and actions taken to minimise avoidable harm were the least restrictive to ensure people’s freedoms and choices were respected. Staff recruitment checks, including a criminal record check, had been undertaken to ensure suitability to work with vulnerable adults. Staffing levels were flexible and responsive to people’s changing needs.

People had their medicines ordered, administered, recorded and disposed of safely by trained staff. When a medicine error had occurred, staff were honest and transparent and ensured the appropriate actions were taken to ensure the persons safety and enable lessons to be learnt. Working with other health professionals such as occupational therapists enabled better health outcomes for people. Records showed us people had access for planned and emergency health care including opticians, dentists and audiologists.

Staff completed an induction and on-going training and support which enabled them to carry out their roles effectively. Opportunities for professional development included diplomas in health and social care and opportunities to undertake the registered nurse associate training at a local university.

We observed people receiving kind, compassionate care and having their privacy, dignity and independence respected. People and their families consistently spoke positively about the staff team providing examples of their kindness and patience. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual communication skills which meant they were able to ensure people were involved in decisions about their day to day care. 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 supported this practice.

Pre-admission assessments had been completed with people to gather information about their care needs and choices. The information had been used to create person centred care plans that reflected people’s spiritual, cultural and lifestyle choices and were reviewed with people and/or families on a regular basis. People had an opportunity to be involved in end of life care planning which included any cultural requirements. Feedback from families described kind, dignified care at the end of a persons’ life.

People, their families and staff spoke positively about the management changes in the home and describing staff morale as high due to good communications and teamwork. We observed an open, honest culture where staff felt able to express their views and opinions and told us they felt appreciated in their roles. Leadership was visible, promoted person centred care and met legal reporting requirements.

Quality assurance processes were effective in identifying, monitoring and reviewing areas requiring improvement ensuring continued and sustainable improvements. People, their families and the staff team had opportunities to be involved and engaged in developing the service through regular meetings, newsletters and social events. Feedback was used to reflect on practice and improve the outcomes for people. A complaints process was in place and people and families felt they would be listened to and any necessary actions taken by the manager.

Rating at last inspection: At our last inspection carried out on 23, 24 and 25 January 2018 the service was overall rated as requires improvement. Our report was published on 13 April 2018.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. At our last inspection we found a breach in regulation as actions in place to minimise avoidable harm to people were not always being followed. Medicines had not always been stored, administered or recorded safely. We asked the provider for an action plan detailing how they would improve the service to a rating of ‘Good’ and checked these actions at this inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk