Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Felbury House

Goodpublished 20 October 2022, 3 years ago

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

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were protected from harm and abuse. Medicines were given safely, though some records were incomplete. Staffing levels were enough to meet people's needs.
Effective?
Good
People's needs were assessed and care was planned using best practice. Staff were trained and supported. People had access to healthcare and were supported to eat and drink well.
Caring?
Good
Staff treated people with kindness and respect. People were involved in decisions and encouraged to be independent.
Responsive?
Good
Care was personalised to meet individual needs. People had some activities and outings, but some wanted more options inside the home.
Well-led?
Requires improvement
Leadership and governance did not always identify problems. Some staff felt the culture was unfair. The provider had tried to address this but had not yet succeeded.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2022

Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind, and effective care but leadership and management need improvement.

Inspectors visited Felbury House unannounced on 1 August 2022 to check the quality and safety of care. They spoke with people living there, their families, staff, and reviewed records about care, medicines, and staff recruitment.

People told inspectors they felt safe and well cared for. Staff were kind and respectful, and people were supported to make choices and maintain independence. Medicines were given on time, but some records about creams and room temperatures were not always complete.

The home provided good support with eating, drinking, and healthcare appointments. Activities were available but some people said there was not enough to do inside the home, especially for those less able to go out. The provider planned to improve this.

The main concern was about leadership and management. The provider’s checks did not always spot problems with medicines or staff supervision. Some staff felt the culture was unfair and affected morale. The provider had tried to fix this but had not yet succeeded.

What inspectors praised

  • Kind and respectful care

    Staff treated people with dignity and kindness and supported their independence.

    “We observed how staff interacted with people in a very kind and caring manner.” from the report

  • Safe medicines administration

    Medicines were given on time and staff were trained to use the new electronic system.

    “People told us they received their medication in accordance with their prescription.” from the report

  • Infection control measures

    The home followed government guidance and staff used PPE effectively.

    “We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Leadership and governance

    needs fixing

    Management did not always spot problems with medicines records and staff supervision.

    “Quality monitoring processes failed to identify issues found at the inspection.” from the report

  • Staff culture and morale

    needs fixing

    Some staff felt there was unfairness and favouritism, affecting teamwork and morale.

    “We are not a team, a lot of the staff are linked and it does not work; you feel like you can't say anything because they all have each other's backs.” from the report

  • Activities for less mobile people

    minor

    Some people said there were not enough activities inside the home for those who could not go out.

    “There is possibly not enough stimulation at times in the home.” from the report

  • Staff workload

    minor

    Care staff had extra duties like laundry and cleaning at weekends which stretched staffing.

    “This is a lot of extra work on top of our caring role, especially as we usually have 30 residents.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to improve leadership and staff supervision since the inspection?
  2. 02How does the home support staff to work well together and address concerns about fairness?
  3. 03What activities are available for people who prefer to stay inside or have limited mobility?
  4. 04How does the home ensure medicines records are kept fully up to date?
  5. 05How are staffing levels managed at weekends and during staff absences to avoid extra workload?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering all key areas of care and management. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 October 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Felbury House

4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. October 2022Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Felbury House →

  2. February 2021Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
  3. December 2018Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
  4. September 2017Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
  5. November 2015Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
  6. June 2021

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2021.

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

This home

Fees, photos and reviews from families

Guide

How to read CQC ratings and reports

Guide

What to check when you visit

Care at home

77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey

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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

Ivanka Z.
1 review
From £1,120 a week, 9 years caring
Based about 7 minutes from Surrey. Can care for a couple
Reda S.
3 reviews
From £1,120 a week, 11 years caring
Based about 23 minutes from Surrey. Can care for a couple
Gabor I.
1 review
From £1,050 a week, 11 years caring
Based about 24 minutes from Surrey. Can care for a couple
Aman A.
3 reviews
From £980 a week, 7 years caring
Based about 31 minutes from Surrey. Can care for a couple
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
Emma P., about Aman A.
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
Clare M., about Zion S.
See live-in carers near SurreyProfiles, 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.