We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fairmount 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 Fairmount, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
Outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support. People were supported on a daily basis to make choices in all areas of daily living from what they ate and drank to what clothes they chose to wear and activities they pursued. People where provided with opportunities that enabled them to gain independence and supported them to pursue new skills.
Risks to people’s health and safety had been identified and actions were in place to ensure risk was minimised. Consideration had been given to ensure that any actions identified placed minimal restriction on the persons day to day life. Staff were aware of the actions to take if they thought anyone was at risk of harm or discrimination. Incidents and accidents were well managed. Medicine procedures and systems were robust.
Staffing numbers were reviewed and assessed dependant on people’s needs. Care and support were delivered in line with current legislation and evidence based guidance. Regular reviews were completed to ensure peoples outcomes were being met and they were being supported in the least restrictive way to encourage their independence. People were encouraged to make choices and decisions.
Staff had access to appropriate training and support to ensure they could meet people’s complex needs. New staff completed a full induction and all staff had access to regular one to one support by management.
People were supported to have a varied and nutritious diet. A relative told us they were impressed with the choice offered to people. People had the opportunity to participate in food preparation and cooking and some people enjoyed going out for meals.
Staff knew people well and demonstrated a clear understanding around equality and diversity. They were able to support people to do individual tasks and activities of their choice. Peoples individuality was explored and encouraged with activities and pastimes adapted to meet their needs. Respecting people’s privacy and dignity was embedded into the culture of how care was provided at Fairmount. Staff communicated well with people in a way they could understand.
Care plans included detail which enabled all staff to provide consistent person centred care which had been tailored to ensure the maximum opportunities for people to explore activities and experiences of their choice. Activities varied from person to person and staff knew the things people liked to do and what they enjoyed.
The home had an open culture. A robust system was in place to report and investigate complaints. Feedback from visitors was positive.
People’s end of life wishes had been discussed and documented. Fairmount was people’s home and the emphasis would always be on people being able to stay at home until they died. However, if this was not appropriate then staff would work closely to ensure the transition to another health setting was as stress free as possible.
Regular checks and audits were carried out to ensure the quality and safety of care being provided.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection in August 2016 the service was rated Good.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: We will review the service in line with our methodology for ‘Good’ services.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
The age range of people living at the service is 48 – 59. The service provides care and support to people living with a range of learning disabilities and mental health needs and longer term complex healthcare needs such as epilepsy. Most people living at Fairmount were unable to communicate verbally. People had been living at the service for between 11 to 20 years. There were six people living at the service on the day of our inspection.
We last inspected Fairmount on 3 September 2013 where we found it to be compliant with all areas inspected.
A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People appeared happy and relaxed with staff. There were sufficient staff to support them. Checks were undertaken to ensure staff were suitable to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding and knew what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place. A wide range of specialist training was provided to ensure staff were confident to meet people’s needs.
It was clear staff had spent considerable time with people, getting to know them, gaining an understanding of their personal history and building rapport with them. People were provided with a choice of healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met.
People’s needs had been assessed and detailed care plans developed. Care plans contained risk assessments for a wide range of daily living needs. For example, seizures and falls. People consistently received the care they required, and staff members were clear on people’s individual needs. Care was provided with kindness and compassion. Staff members were responsive to people’s changing needs. People’s health and wellbeing was continually monitored and the provider regularly liaised with healthcare professionals for advice and guidance.
Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.
The CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found that the manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make specific decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests.
People were provided with opportunities to take part in a range of activities and hobbies and to regularly access the local and wider area. People were supported to take an active role in decision making regarding their own routines and the routines and flow of their home.
Staff had a clear understanding of the vision and philosophy of the home and they spoke enthusiastically about working at Fairmount and positively about senior staff. The registered manager and operations manager undertook regular quality assurance reviews to monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement.
There were processes in place to support people to make informed decisions about their care and support whenever possible.
Each person had a comprehensive person centred care plan in place that included their individual wishes and also recorded their physical and emotional healthcare needs.
The home's staff worked with a variety of healthcare professionals including district nurses, speech and language therapists and the local learning disability team.
We spoke with staff and reviewed records which showed us that people were protected for risk of abuse and their care was delivered in a safe manner.
Staff were well supported and trained and had the skills they needed to safely support people.
There were processes in place to identify, address and record complaints and concerns.
Comments from a family member that spoke with us included. 'I am very happy with the standard of care in the home. There is lots for people to do and I am kept informed if there are any concerns at all.'
We were not able to communicate with people directly as they had complex needs. People were very anxious about having unknown visitors in their home and when offered an opportunity to be involved in the inspection, they indicated their preference not to be.
We spoke with staff who told us the how they kept people safe from harm and the actions they would take if they had any concerns. They told us they attended training to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. This was confirmed by the staff records that we reviewed. Staff told us there was an open culture in the home. They told us that their managers were approachable and they felt able to raise anything with them at any time. They also had regular one to one meetings with their manager for personal and performance review.
We looked at the quality monitoring processes that were in place to evaluate the standards of care, safety and well being of people who used the service. The records we looked at showed regular assessments took place and action plans were completed to maintain standards.