We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fair Haven Care Home 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 Fair Haven Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider ensured current guidelines in relation to COVID-19 were being followed by staff and visitors to reduce the risk of infection. This included comprehensive checks for staff and visitors when they arrived at the service.
The service was clean and fresh. Housekeeping staff ensured that all high touch points, such as door handles, were cleaned frequently, and deep cleaning took place on a regular basis. Posters provided advice on topics such as hand-washing and social distancing. Staff had received training in infection control and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). The provider had maintained an ample supply of PPE. We saw staff using PPE correctly. This helped reduce the risk of cross contamination.
Staff felt safe working at the service and told us the registered manager supported them very well. The provider had completed risk assessments to help ensure the people using the service and staff stayed safe.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had a separate area from the home for staff to change into newly cleaned uniforms and have their temperature checked prior to starting their shift. Staff used the hand washing facilities within the home. Appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) was worn by all staff.
Only essential visitors were admitted within the home, they were required to take a Lateral Flow Test (LFT) this gives a quick COVID-19 result and all visitors were required to follow the infection control protocols in place.
People were supported by staff in full PPE, this is called barrier nursing. This is to protect both staff and people who lived at the service. At the time of our inspection no service users had tested positive for COVID-19. There were places within the home for staff to put on and take off their PPE appropriately, this is called donning and doffing.
Staff received inhouse training for donning and doffing and infection control, this was followed up with competency assessments to ensure staff followed best practice guidelines. There were information boards that gave advice on topics such as infection control and hand washing. The registered manager had compiled a COVID-19 folder that covered what to do in variable situations for example an infection outbreak. The folder contained all relevant contact details that would be needed.
The building looked clean and free from clutter. appropriate cleaning products were used, to ensure good infection control was maintained. All high touch points were cleaned regularly for example, door handles. The registered manager ensured regular infection control audit checks were completed including daily staff observations.
The registered manager told us that they were working collaboratively with colleagues from the Local Authority and CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group) and received good support and advice. The registered manager confirmed they had a very good supportive staff team.
Fair Haven Care Home is a residential care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 30 older people some of whom are living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People at this service were well cared for by staff who loved their jobs. People using the service were relaxed with staff and the way staff interacted with people had a positive effect on their well-being. People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion and their privacy, dignity and independence were promoted. One visitor said, “A good thing here is the level of care, it’s very good.”
Systems and process were in place at the service which kept people safe in all areas of their care including the administration of medicines.
People’s feedback was consistently positive about the care they received. People particularly liked the service because of the caring staff. One person told us, “Staff have got a lot of patience with us oldies.” One visitor said, “Visitors can come any time, day or night and they are made welcome, offered a cup of tea.”
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Enough staff were available on each shift to support people and robust recruitment checks were carried out before staff started working at the service. Staff received induction, training and supervision to ensure that they had the right skills and abilities to support people.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet.
Systems were in place to monitor the service, which ensured that people's risks were mitigated, and lessons were learnt when things went wrong. There was an open culture within the service, where people and staff could approach the registered manager who acted on concerns raised to make improvements to people's care.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 16 January 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
We inspected this service on 01 and 02 December 2016. The inspection was unannounced.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Systems were in place to manage risks to people using the service. Both the registered provider and registered manager had a positive attitude towards managing risk and keeping people safe. Detailed risk assessments were in place which gave staff clear direction as to what action to take to minimise risk. These included safeguarding matters, behaviours that were challenging to others and medication. Risks were assessed in a consistent and positive way and protected people’s dignity, rights and independence.
Staff understood and adhered to the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). These safeguards protect the rights of adults who use the service by ensuring that if there are restrictions on their freedom and liberty these are assessed by professionals who consider whether the restriction is appropriate and needed. The registered manager had made an appropriate DoLS application to the local authority to ensure that restrictions on a person’s ability to leave the service unaccompanied were lawful. Advocacy support had been provided where necessary.
There was a sufficient number of staff on duty to meet people’s needs and to keep them safe. The provider’s recruitment and selection process ensured staff recruited had the right skills and experience. Regular police checks were carried out to ensure staff were suitable to work with people who used the service. Staff received a thorough induction when they started work and had access to an ongoing programme of training which gave them the skills, knowledge and confidence to carry out their role.
Staff knew the needs of the people they supported well. People were involved in determining the level of support they needed and their independence was promoted. Staff offered people choices and these were respected. People were supported to carry on with their usual routines, their hobbies and accessing places of interest in the community. People were provided with sufficient food and drink of their choice to stay healthy and were encouraged to maintain a balanced diet. People were supported to manage their health and had access to health care professionals, when they needed them.
There was a strong emphasis on promoting good practice in the service. Staff were clear about the registered providers vision and values in relation to delivering a service with ‘Pride and Dignity’. The registered provider had also signed up to the Social Care Commitment to provide people who needed care and support with high quality services. Staff received the training and support they needed to provide high quality compassionate care. A staff recognition of achievement scheme was in place that recognised where staff had gone above and beyond their role to benefit the people who used the service.
The provider had a range of systems in place to assess, monitor and further develop the quality of the service. This included quality monitoring visits of the service and monitoring of incidents, accidents, safeguarding concerns and complaints.
This unannounced inspection was carried out on 24 November 2015.This was the first inspection of this service since Care for your Life (Fair Haven) Limited had been registered with the Care Quality Commission as the provider. This change of registration occurred on 6 June 2015.
Fair Haven Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for 30 people. At the time of this inspection there were 27 older people, some of whom were living with dementia accommodated at the home. The home is situated over two floors, which can be assessed by stairs, a lift, and a stair lift. There are a number of communal areas within the home, including lounges, dining areas and a garden for people to use.
There was a registered manager in place. 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.
Staff were aware of the procedures for reporting concerns and protecting people from harm. Staff were only employed after the provider had carried out satisfactory pre-employment checks.
Staff were trained to provide effective care which met people’s individual needs. Staff understood their role and responsibilities to report poor care. Staff were supported by the registered manager to develop their skills and knowledge through regular supervision, appraisals and training.
People who used the service were supported by staff who were kind, respectful and promoted their privacy and dignity. People had individualised care and support plans in place which recorded their care and support needs. Individual risks to people were identified by staff. Plans were put into place to minimise these risks and to enable people to live as independent and safe a life as possible. These records guided staff on any assistance a person may require. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people were supported and protected with the safe management of their prescribed medication.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. We found that there were formal systems in place to assess people’s capacity for decision making and applications had been made to the authorising agencies for people who needed these safeguards. Staff respected people choices and staff were aware of the key legal requirements of the MCA and DoLS.
People were supported to take part in activities within the home and the local community. People’s family and friends were encouraged to visit the home to help support and promote people’s social inclusion.
There was an ‘open’ culture within the home. People and their relatives were able to raise any suggestions or concerns that they might have with staff and the registered manager. People were supported to access a range of external health care professionals and were supported to maintain their health. People’s health and nutritional needs were met.
The registered manager sought feedback about the quality of the service provided from people who used the service, their relatives and staff by holding regular meetings. They had in place a quality monitoring process to identify areas of improvement required within the home.