Fairhaven Care Home

“The provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating to good governance.”

“Governance and oversight systems were not always effective. Audits failed to identify the risks we found at this assessment in relation to the environment, infection control, and safe medicine management. These issues were discussed with the provider and management team at the time of the assessment, and they agreed to take immediate action to address these concerns.”

“However, staff demonstrated an understanding of individual needs, respecting preferences, promoting independence, and engaging people in meaningful activities. Recruitment practices were safe, and staffing levels were sufficient, with trained and skilled staff supporting people safely and responsively. Partnerships with health professionals and the community supported continuity of care, safe transitions, and engagement in broader community life. Safeguarding and infection prevention and control systems were generally understood, and people reported feeling safe. Equality and inclusion were promoted, with staff treating people respectfully and supporting access to care in line with individual needs.”

“Feedback we received from people, relatives and staff was positive. There was a positive culture within the service, which prompted good outcomes for people. There were systems in place to learn and improve when incidents occurred and effective safeguarding processes in place.”

“Where people lacked capacity to consent to their care and treatment, mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been completed in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.”

“People’s needs were assessed before and after they moved into the home. This was used as the basis for personalised care plans to ensure care supported people’s preferences and wellbeing. People were supported to eat and drink well and were provided with opportunities to partake in activities and social events if they wished.”

“ ”