CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fairmont Residential Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. They checked visitors, social distancing, protective equipment, testing, hygiene, outbreak arrangements and the infection-control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not covered by the targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, August 2020
Fairmont Residential Limited was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 August 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures as part of a national COVID-19 review.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, shielding, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and infection outbreaks. They also found that the infection-control policy was up to date.
The home used pictures and social stories to explain COVID-19 changes to people. Relatives visiting outdoors were asked to take a virus test, and risk assessments supported people to continue community activities safely.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Accessible communication
The home used pictures and social stories to help people understand COVID-19 changes, including masks and virus testing.
“Staff used pictorials and social stories to support people to understand how Covid-19 may affect their daily lives and the support they received from staff.” from the report
Visitor safety
Relatives visiting outdoors were asked to take a virus test before seeing their family member.
“Visiting relatives were asked to undertake a test for the virus before visiting their family member in the outdoor spaces of the home.” from the report
Community activities
Risk assessments were completed so people could access activities in the community safely.
“Risk assessments to mitigate risk of infection had been completed for people to enable them to safely access activities within the community.” from the report
Infection-control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements covering protective equipment, testing, hygiene and possible outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently tested and supported to prevent infections?
- 02How do you explain changes in care, face masks or testing to people who use the home?
- 03How are risk assessments used when people take part in activities in the community?
- 04What infection-prevention and control training do staff receive now?
- 05How often is the infection-prevention and control policy reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 August 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, December 2018
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a minor gap in knowledge about accessible information standards.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 19 November 2018. One inspector observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and managers, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and quality records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were protected from abuse, supported safely with medicines, and cared for by trained staff who knew their needs.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Their care plans reflected their wishes, they took part in activities they enjoyed, and relatives were involved in care decisions. The home had systems to monitor quality and respond to incidents, complaints and suggestions.
The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, published on 14 March 2016. Inspectors noted that managers were not aware of the Accessible Information Standards, although people were receiving information in suitable formats.
Safe medicines support
Inspectors found that trained and competent staff supported people safely with their medicines. The home also had arrangements for responding to medicine errors.
“People were safely supported with their medicines by a trained and competent staff team.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Inspectors saw positive, compassionate interactions between people and staff.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on people's individual preferences and interests. People took part in activities they found enjoyable and stimulating.
“People took part in activities that they enjoyed, found interesting and stimulating.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The management team checked areas such as medicines, the environment and people's care. Incidents, accidents and complaints were reviewed to identify improvements.
“The management team and provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service that they provided.” from the report
Accessible information knowledge
minorManagers were not aware of the Accessible Information Standards. Inspectors said the home was meeting the principles in practice, but this remains an area to clarify if your relative has communication or sensory needs.
“However, neither the management team or provider were aware of the accessible information standards albeit they were meeting the principles as part of their assessment.” from the report
- 01How would you assess and record my relative's communication needs, and provide information in a format they can understand?
- 02How would you support my relative with their medicines, and what would happen if there were a medicine error?
- 03How would my relative's care plan involve them and their family, and how often would it be reviewed?
- 04What activities would be available based on my relative's interests, choices and abilities?
- 05How do you use complaints, accidents and feedback from families to improve care?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; people could not fully share their experiences, so inspectors also observed care and spoke with relatives and staff. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 December 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.
Every inspection of Fairmont Residential Limited
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Fairmont Residential Limited →
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Fairmont Residential Limited →
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 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.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Worcestershire
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 £1,260 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.