Fairhaven Care Home

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.

People felt their needs were met in a way they liked, and relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. A relative said, “[Person] was complex and had [name of diagnosis]. [Person] was strong minded, they [staff] understood them, they knew [person] as well as I did, I can’t fault them at all.” Another relative told us, “They [staff] know [person] very well, they know what they does and doesn’t like.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s support needs and preferences. They understood what person-centred care meant and we observed this in practice during the assessment visits. A staff member told us, “Care is person-centred and we have time to provide people with the care they want.” Another staff member said, I think this is the best care home, I feel I have time to spend with people and they are happy, they enjoy daily activities.”

Health and social care professionals praised the service for the level of person-centred care provided. There comments included, “Approaches are tailored to the individuals needs and promote human rights” and “Whilst I was present in the home, I saw staff interacting with residents in a positive, person-centred manner.”

The management team carried out spot checks and supervision of staff to help ensure they worked in a person-centred way.

People’s individual care records contained detailed personalised information, including their likes and dislikes, personal abilities and social interests and preferences, as well as spiritual or religious views and what support may be required to meet these.

People and relatives informed us they had been involved in the care planning process and described how they had been included in making decisions and choices about their care. A relative told us, “They [staff] always talked to [person]; they would sit and listen to them to come up with a plan to achieve what they wanted and with me involved. They would always call me if we could achieve something together.”

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.

The management team and staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s diverse health and care needs. Staff and the management team shared information effectively during handovers and through care records, which ensured people received consistent support from familiar staff who understood their routines and preferences.

Staff had received training to develop their knowledge of individuals care requirements to ensure they effectively met people’s needs.

People and their relatives told us staff understood what care they may need and were confident staff would support them well when they received care from other health and social care organisations. Relatives confirmed they were informed if their family members required support from other agencies.

All health and social care professionals we spoke with told us staff understood the health and care needs of the people they cared for. Health and social care professionals gave us examples of how staff had successfully worked with a range of other health and social care professionals, so people would have the care they needed.

Continuity of care was supported because people’s needs were regularly reviewed by the management team and staff.

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

People’s communication needs were assessed during the assessment process, with information recorded about how staff could communicate with them. This included information on any equipment used to improve communication, glasses and hearing aids for example. The management team told us people and relatives were provided with written information about the service and how to complain should the need arise, which would be provided in different formats and alternative languages if required.

Staff adapted their communication to meet people’s individual needs and preferences, such as speaking in a tone and pace people could understand and giving people time to respond. The management team set clear expectations and monitored practice through observations and supervisions, which helped ensure care was adapted to meet people’s individual preferences.

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.

People told us they were listened to and given the opportunity to share their views. A person told us, “They [staff] are wonderful, we always chat about things.” Relatives’ comments included, “They [staff] are really good at communicating with [person]. They [staff] go to her level, squat down, they come down to her height so it’s not threatening. They treat her like part of a big family.”

The management team told us they listened to people and ensured they were involved in their care and treatment. They took all feedback, complaints and compliments seriously and ensured all concerns were investigated.

People and relatives all said they felt able to raise issues and share views with staff and the management team at any time. People, relatives and professionals described the staff and management team as attentive, responsive and approachable.

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

Discussions with the management team showed they understood how to access specialist health or social care support should this be required and we saw evidence that specialist services such as mental health professionals and community nurses were contacted promptly and appropriately where there was a change in people’s needs. This was confirmed by health and social care professionals.

Arrangements were in place to ensure staff had appropriate access to support for emergencies when a member of the leadership team was not on site. This included a clear on-call rota and emergency protocols.

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.

The service was non-discriminatory and people and their relatives told us their individual needs were respected. The management team actively ensured the people they supported were treated fairly and not discriminated against. Where required reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes had been made. For example, mobility aids and specialist cutlery were provided where required and people with religious and cultural needs were supported to follow their faith. The adjustments described helped to improve people’s experience.

People's care plans contained information in relation to people’s protected characteristics, beliefs and preferences and staff had completed training in Equality and Diversity and demonstrated this was understood.

Policies and procedures were in place in relation to equity, equality and diversity.

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.

Staff worked closely with people to make plans about their future care. Should end of life care be required this was provided in line with the person’s wishes which was well documented and detailed within people’s care records. Evidence provided demonstrated staff had received training in death, dying and bereavement.

Staff knew about people’s wishes in respect of the level of emergency care (resuscitation) or hospital admission. Documentation was in place via electronic care plans and original copies were maintained within an office which staff always had access to.