CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Felix House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Felix House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed safely.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full range of care.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visits, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and COVID-19 vaccinations. They were assured that the home could prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated overall. Safe was also recorded as inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a Good or Outstanding rating and does not assess the other four areas.
Safe visiting
The home supported contact with relatives and friends through window visits, calls and controlled in-house visits. Visitors needed a negative lateral flow test, temperature checks, hand washing and a face mask.
“Window visits and telephone or video calls were arranged for people who wanted this contact.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
Staff were tested three times a week and residents every four weeks, with extra tests if someone was unwell or had symptoms. People and staff had received their first COVID-19 vaccination dose.
“The staff team were being tested three times a week and people who lived at the home were tested every four weeks.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Extra cleaning of frequently touched areas had been added to daily tasks, with managers checking cleaning and PPE arrangements.
“The home was clean and tidy and extra touch-point cleaning tasks had been added to the daily tasks lists.” from the report
Staff infection control training
Staff had completed infection prevention and control training, including how to use PPE, hand hygiene and recognising signs and symptoms of illness.
“The registered manager said that all staff had redone their IPC training and also additional training” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current rules for visiting relatives, and are visitors still asked to test, wear a mask and book in advance?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested now, and what happens if someone has COVID-19 symptoms?
- 03What arrangements are in place if a new resident joins the home, including testing and any period of isolation?
- 04How would the home manage an infection outbreak, and would residents need to stay in their bedrooms?
- 05What are the home's current ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led, since this inspection did not assess them?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; it did not provide ratings for the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 April 2021 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, May 2018
Felix House rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but some records and checks needed improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 12 April 2018. Inspectors spoke with seven people, four staff, five relatives or friends and seven professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files and other service documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, caring relationships, personalised care plans, suitable training and systems to support people's safety and wellbeing.
Inspectors did find some gaps. These included incomplete medicines records and audits, DBS checks that were not regularly reviewed, missing capacity and best-interest documents in some cases, and wellbeing plans that were not regularly reviewed. The overall rating stayed Good, as it had at the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were described as caring and understood how to support people's wellbeing, choices and independence.
“Staff were respectful and caring and had a good understanding of how they could support people with a focus on their wellbeing and abilities.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs, preferences, routines and the way they wanted to be supported.
“People had personalised care plans. These supported staff to provide care that was responsive and effective.” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and observed staff supporting people with appointments and activities.
“Staffing levels were safe and suitable to meet people's needs.” from the report
People's views included
The home used meetings, surveys and care reviews to hear people's views. Relatives said they felt involved in decisions and care planning.
“People's views were sought through house meetings, surveys and care reviews.” from the report
Medicines records and audits
needs fixingMedicines were generally managed safely, but some records had gaps and medication audits had not been fully completed for two months.
“Medication audits were usually carried out, although these had not been fully completed for the past two months.” from the report
DBS checks
needs fixingRecruitment files contained the required information, but the provider did not regularly review staff DBS checks.
“The provider did not regularly review staffs' DBS checks, which we highlighted to the registered manager.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingIn some cases, capacity assessments and related best-interest decisions were not available for review. Inspectors recommended following the Mental Capacity Act guidance on reviewing and recording these decisions.
“the capacity assessment and associated best interest decision were not available for review.” from the report
Wellbeing plan reviews
needs fixingPeople had wellbeing plans, but these had not always been reviewed regularly. The registered manager said this would be addressed.
“We highlighted to the registered manager that these plans had not been regularly reviewed.” from the report
- 01What has been done to close the gaps in medicines records and to complete medication audits regularly?
- 02How often are staff DBS checks now reviewed, and how is this recorded?
- 03Are all current mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions now available and reviewed when needed?
- 04How often are residents' wellbeing plans reviewed, and who checks that this happens?
- 05How will you involve my relative and family in care reviews, house meetings and decisions about care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the previous Good ratings remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 May 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 Felix House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 December 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of North Somerset
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 £1,050 to £1,320 a week. 19 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.