CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fairmead
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and their belongings and finances were protected. Inspectors found individual risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment and safe medicines systems.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained in autism and other relevant areas and supported people to maintain their health, diet and wellbeing. Care plans were developed with healthcare professionals and followed best practice guidance.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, knew people well and communicated in ways suited to each person. People were involved in decisions, and their privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's routines, choices, communication needs and goals. People were supported to take part in activities, access the community and maintain family relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, staff and healthcare professionals spoke positively about the manager. The provider and manager used surveys, audits, visits and action plans to monitor and improve the service.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Fairmead was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong support for independence.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 February 2020. One inspector spoke with people and staff, observed care, checked care and medicines records, reviewed staff recruitment and supervision files, and spoke with healthcare professionals.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, individual risk assessments and good support from healthcare professionals.
People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to build independence, use community services and follow their interests. The home had systems for checking quality and making improvements.
The previous inspection also rated the home Good, published on 26 September 2017. This was a planned inspection based on that rating.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, with flexible rotas supporting one-to-one time and activities. Medicines were secure, available when needed and administered by trained staff whose competence was checked.
“There were enough staff available to meet people's needs.” from the report
Personalised support
People's care plans reflected their individual needs, communication styles, routines and goals. Staff worked with other professionals to develop and review support.
“People's needs were assessed and monitored and support plans were put together in conjunction with other healthcare professionals” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their choices, privacy, dignity and independence. People could decide how to spend their time and were encouraged to develop daily living skills.
“Staff were kind and caring when they supported people and gave emotional support when needed.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to attend activities, use community services, maintain relationships and work towards personal goals such as college or woodwork.
“People were supported to achieve goals they had set for themselves and maintain as much control over their choices as possible.” from the report
Good oversight
The provider and manager used quality checks, feedback and action plans to review the service and make improvements. Staff felt able to raise concerns and suggestions.
“The registered manager had a quality monitoring system in place to ensure the quality and safety of the service was regularly reviewed” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative's particular communication needs, and how would new staff learn to communicate with them?
- 02How would you support my relative to build independence and work towards their own goals?
- 03What activities and community opportunities would be available that match my relative's interests and abilities?
- 04How would you review medicines with the GP, including whether any medicines could be reduced?
- 05How would you involve our family, an advocate or other professionals in reviews and decisions about care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous Good ratings were reassessed and remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 April 2020 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.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 31 May and 2 June 2017 by one inspector. The inspector observed care, spoke with staff and managers, and reviewed care files, staff records, audits and policies.
The home supported one person at the time, and was assessing a second person. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable safety checks, safe medicines practice, trained staff and good support with health, food and drink.
Inspectors found staff to be kind and respectful. The person's relatives were involved in care planning, support was tailored to the person's preferences, and activities and community access were encouraged.
All five areas were rated Good. The report says these ratings remained Good compared with the previous inspection.
Safe staffing and risk support
Staffing was based on the person's assessed needs, with extra staff when the person went into the community. Risk assessments had been reviewed and gave practical guidance.
“There were sufficient staff on duty to meet the person's assessed needs and when the person accessed the community additional staff were deployed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated the person with kindness and respect. They promoted independence and involved the person in decisions about support.
“Our observations during the inspection showed staff to be kind, caring and support the person in a compassionate manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described the person's preferences, strengths and independence. Photographs and detailed guidance helped staff provide care in the person's preferred way.
“These were fully person centred and gave detailed guidance for staff so that staff could consistently deliver the care and support the person needed” from the report
Good management checks
The home used regular audits covering areas such as care plans, health and safety and infection control. Actions were recorded and checked at later audits.
“Actions arising from the audit were detailed in the report and included expected dates of completion and these were then checked at the next monthly audit.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and plan care for my relative before they moved in?
- 02How would staffing levels change if more people moved into the home?
- 03How would you support my relative to make everyday choices and remain as independent as possible?
- 04How are medicines administered, recorded and checked?
- 05How would you update the care plan if my relative's needs or mobility changed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the report says the ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 September 2017 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.
Every inspection of Fairmead
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 October 2012.
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.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
52 live-in carers within about an hour of Southend-on-Sea
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 £1,200 a week. 45 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
“She was always cheerful and looking for ways to stimulate my mother. She became her "friend" and provided best care always.”
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.