Fairfax House provides accommodation and personal care for up to 20 older people, some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, 20 people were resident at the home. Fairfax House was last inspected in May 2013 and was found to be meeting all of the standards assessed.

This inspection took place on 12 December 2016 and was unannounced. We returned on16 December 2016 to complete the inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager is responsible for the day to day management of the home. At the time of the inspection, the registered manager was on leave and therefore not available. In the registered manager’s absence, the provider assisted with the inspection and was available throughout.

Potential risks to people’s safety had been identified and addressed. However, covers had not been fitted to radiators so people were at risk of injury, if they touched or fell against the hot surfaces. The provider told us consideration would be given to this and the installation of radiator covers would be added to next year’s business plan.

Staff were responsive to people’s needs and consistently spoke to people in a caring, friendly and respectful manner. There were many positive interactions between people and staff, particularly at lunchtime whilst assisting people to eat. Staff spent time with people and engaged them in general conversation and reminiscence. Staff were attentive and provided a relaxed but engaging environment for people.

There was a strong, person centred ethos, which was adopted throughout the staff team. People were encouraged to follow their own routines and make choices about aspects of their lives such as what time they got up and went to bed. People were encouraged to undertake meaningful activity and regularly access the local community. People’s rights to privacy, dignity, choice and independence were consistently promoted.

People were supported to remain healthy and received sufficient to eat and drink. They received their medicines in a person centred manner. However, one medicine had not been signed as given and one record did not give staff information about a variable dose. The provider told us they would address these issues without delay. All other areas of medicine management were safely managed.

There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs. Adequate staffing levels were clearly linked to the provision of good care. As a result of this, staffing numbers were adjusted as people’s needs changed and dependency increased. The addition of two waking night staff had recently been introduced to enhance people’s safety.

People were supported by staff who were well trained and knew them well. The staff training programme was detailed and covered a comprehensive range of subjects. There was a strong focus on staff’s learning and development and the impact this had on good care provision. Staff felt well supported and regularly met with their manager to discuss their work. There were schemes in place to value staff and enhance morale.

Systems were in place to minimise the risk of people suffering abuse. Staff received regular training and updates in safeguarding. This equipped them to be clear of their responsibilities to identify and report any suspicion or allegation of abuse.

Management systems were well organised. There were regular audits, which monitored the quality of the service. People, their relatives, staff and health care professionals were encouraged to give their views about their experiences. Requests were considered and implemented to improve the service people received. People and their rel

The home was transferred into a limited company on 12th October 2012. The owners of the company remain the same, as the partnership from which it was transferred.

People told us they were very happy with the care they received. They said staff assisted them with their personal care in a caring and considerate manner.

We saw people were encouraged to make decisions in their daily lives and their rights to privacy and dignity were maintained.

People had good support from health care professionals and were able to make their own appointments if they wanted to.

A comprehensive range of social and leisure opportunities were offered to people, both in house and within the local community .

People received their medicines in a safe and efficient manner. Staff followed procedures and were regularly monitored to ensure best practice.

Staff were given a range of opportunities to develop their knowledge and skills in a way which met their individual needs. Staff were fully supported and worked well as a team.

People were encouraged to give their views about the service and its development. A clear auditing system was in place to monitor the on going quality of the service provided.