Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Fair Haven Care Home

Goodpublished 9 June 2026, 3 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, April 2022

Fair Haven Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control during the COVID-19 review.

This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 23 February 2022. Inspectors focused on infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.

Inspectors found regular testing and screening for visitors, staff and residents. They found appropriate use of personal protective equipment, vaccination arrangements, risk assessments, cleaning schedules and regular audits.

The home was inspected but not rated overall. The Safe question was also inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a standard Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.

What inspectors praised
  • Infection prevention

    Inspectors found that people, staff and visitors were protected from the spread of COVID-19 through testing, screening and risk assessments.

    “People, staff and visitors were protected again the spread of COVID-19.” from the report
  • Clean environment

    The home was clean and had daily cleaning arrangements for frequently touched areas.

    “The environment appeared clean and had no odours. High touch areas and room cleaning schedules were in place and completed daily.” from the report
  • Protective equipment

    Staff had access to protective equipment and hand sanitiser, and had received training on using it.

    “All staff received infection prevention and control (IPC) and donning and doffing training.” from the report
  • Oversight

    The registered manager and senior staff carried out audits, and the provider kept its infection control policy up to date.

    “The registered manager and senior staff completed regular audits to ensure oversight of infection prevention and control practices.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What measures are currently in place to manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19, and have these affected residents?
  2. 02How are staff, residents and visitors currently tested and screened for infections?
  3. 03How often are high-touch areas and residents' rooms cleaned, and how is this checked?
  4. 04How are staff trained and checked in the safe use of personal protective equipment?
  5. 05How can relatives visit safely if infection levels or outbreaks change?

This was an unannounced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; it was not a full rated inspection of all five questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, November 2018

Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind care, but activities and community access required improvement.

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 29 October 2018. One inspector spoke with people, staff and managers, reviewed four care records and two recruitment files, and checked the home's quality records.

People were safe and received their medicines correctly. Staff were trained and supported, people received help with health and nutrition, and inspectors saw kind and respectful care. The home was clean, although some areas needed decoration and refurbishment.

The main weakness was activities and social contact. There were not enough staff to provide regular meaningful activities, conversations or support for people to use the community. The overall rating stayed Good, but Responsive was rated Requires Improvement.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors saw warm interactions and staff gave people time to communicate without being rushed.

    “We saw that staff interacted with people in a warm and friendly manner, and gave people the time they required to respond and communicate without being rushed.” from the report
  • Safe medicines and recruitment

    Medicines records were completed accurately, medicines were stored securely and recruitment checks were carried out before staff began work.

    “Records confirmed that Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were completed and references obtained from previous employers before new staff began work at the service.” from the report
  • Staff training and support

    Staff received induction, training, supervision and ongoing development to support their roles.

    “All the staff we spoke with confirmed that the induction process was effective and gave them the confidence they required to provide care for the people at the service.” from the report
  • Quality oversight

    Managers used audits, meetings and feedback to identify and act on improvements.

    “There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Too few meaningful activities

    needs fixing

    There were enough staff to keep people safe, but not enough to provide regular activities, conversation or community access. People were seen sitting for long periods watching television.

    “We observed that people within the service were sitting for long periods of time in the communal areas of the service, watching television.” from the report
  • Areas needed refurbishment

    minor

    Many areas needed redecoration and refurbishment. Managers said an improvement plan was in place and work was due to begin.

    “Many areas of the home were in need of redecoration and refurbishment.” from the report
  • Clinical waste storage

    needs fixing

    Inspectors found a clinical waste bag with soiled items but no suitable bin available. The manager said the damaged bin would be replaced immediately.

    “We found a clinical waste bag with soiled items in it. There was no appropriate bin for this waste to be stored in.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What regular meaningful activities are now available each day?
  2. 02How do you support residents who want to go into the local community?
  3. 03Has a domestic member of staff been recruited so care staff have more time for activities and conversation?
  4. 04Has the planned redecoration and refurbishment been completed?
  5. 05How do you check that suitable storage is available for clinical waste?

This was an unannounced inspection covering the premises, care provided and all five rating areas; the previous overall rating was Good and the overall rating remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Fair Haven Care Home

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. April 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Fair Haven Care Home →

  2. November 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Fair Haven Care Home →

  3. June 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. July 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. April 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. June 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. September 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. February 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. November 2010

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 2010.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of West Northamptonshire

These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.

Most charge £980 to £1,280 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.

“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
Bridget S., about Nyarai N.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
Caroline C., about Mary K.
See live-in carers near West NorthamptonshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.