Archived: Fair View

Updated 8 March 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on 16 February 2016. The provider was given two days notice of the inspection because people living at the service were often out during the day and we wanted to ensure we would be able to speak with people during the inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the home. This included past reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We met and spoke with one person who lived at the service, the provider and the manager were the staff team. In addition we reviewed a range of records. These included care plans, training records, policies and maintenance records. Following the inspection we spoke with a visiting healthcare professional and a relative.

The service currently provides support to one person. In order to protect this person’s confidentiality this report will not make reference to any specific personal information.

Updated 8 March 2016

This announced comprehensive inspection took pace on 16 February 2016. We announced the inspection to ensure that the people would be at the service during the inspection. Fair View is a care home that provides personal care and support for up to two people with a learning disability. AT the time of our inspection one person was living in the service.

The service Is owned

The person who lived at the service was well cared for. They were comfortable in their home and their privacy and dignity was respected by the people who cared for them. We spoke with a relative and a healthcare professional who were both positive about the care provided at the service.

Care was provided by a small, consistent, motivated staff team who had a good knowledge of people’s needs. The registered manager had attended recent first aid training. However, other areas of training had not been attended recently and needed updating. Skills for Care recommend areas such as fire and health and safety should be attended annually. Other areas such as safeguarding adults, infection control and moving and handling should be attended every three years. There was currently no moving and handling needs at the service. The registered manager explained that access to and the cost of attending such training was challenging. The staff appeared well informed and aware of changes to the legislation around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and knew how to report any concerns they may have regarding any potential abuse.

Risk assessments were in place for a range of issues such as attending a day centre, spending time in the community, and personal care. People had access to a range of activities. They accessed the local community regularly. There had been no accidents or incidents which had taken place at the service. No medicines were being used at the service other than homely remedies such an occasional Paracetamol. Staffing levels met the present care needs of the person that lived at the service. The were plans in place for the emergency care provision of the person should the registered manager and staff be unable to provide care for any reason.

Where people did not have the capacity to make certain decisions, the service acted in accordance with legal requirements under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had a good understanding of the principles of the legislation. The service was in the process of applying for an authorisation from the local authority for a potentially restrictive care plan.

Care plans were informative and contained details of people’s care needs and preferences. There was clear information about the person’s healthcare needs and records of when they attended appointments. The care plan provided guidance which helped ensure their care was individualised and responsive to their needs. Details of how the person which to be cared for were set out in a support plan which was presented in written and pictorial formats. This enabled them to read their own plan and be involved in any changes or updates.

There was a complaint’s policy in place. No complaints had been received by the service. The relative we spoke with confirmed they were very happy with the service provided and had never had any cause to raise a concern. The policy required updating with accurate contact numbers for the local authority. The registered manager assured us this would be addressed immediately. The person had been provided with advocacy support which provided them with the opportunity to raise any concerns.

The registered manager spoke regularly to the relatives and other professionals involved in the care of the person. This was to ask for any feedback on the service they provided and helped ensure it was meeting people’s needs. Relatives confirmed they were contacted should there be any change in the person’s needs.

Fair View was committed to meeting people’s individual needs. There were clear lines of responsibility and accountability within the service. One staff member told us; “We are here for the person, we do whatever they need.”