CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fig House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Fig House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, but visitor temperatures were not being checked.
The inspection took place on 17 February 2022 and was announced 24 hours beforehand. It was a targeted inspection of infection prevention, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors had to show a negative lateral flow test. The home had hand sanitiser, signs about reducing infection risks, good supplies of protective equipment and safe clinical waste procedures. The home was clean and hygienic, and relatives found visiting easy to arrange.
The home was not taking visitors' temperatures. Inspectors advised that this could help reduce the risk further. They were otherwise assured about the home's infection control arrangements, including testing, protective equipment, hygiene, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating, and it does not provide ratings for care, effectiveness, responsiveness or leadership.
Infection control
Visitors had to show a negative lateral flow test. Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely and had systems to prevent or manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Relatives also described the cleanliness as very good.
“The home was clean and hygienic.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Relatives said the online booking system was easy to use. The home also supported families to stay in contact when they could not visit in person.
“I use the online booking system which is very easy to use” from the report
Protective equipment and waste
Staff reported having good supplies of protective equipment and training in how to use it. There were safe procedures for disposing of clinical waste.
“There were procedures in place for disposing of clinical waste safely.” from the report
Visitor temperature checks
minorThe home was not taking visitors' temperatures as an extra check for possible symptoms. Inspectors advised that this should be done in future.
“The service wasn't taking visitor's temperatures as a screening measure and we advised that this was done in future.” from the report
- 01Are visitors now having their temperatures taken before entering the home?
- 02How are negative lateral flow tests checked and recorded for visitors?
- 03How would you contact families if visiting arrangements had to change?
- 04What infection control training have staff received, and how is their use of protective equipment checked?
- 05How do you prevent and manage infection outbreaks among people living with dementia?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not rate the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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.
What inspectors found, March 2019
Fig House was rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with issues about medicine-key access, walking-stick safety and end-of-life records.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 February 2019. The inspection team spoke with people living in the home, staff and relatives. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicines, accidents, complaints, training and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found people were treated kindly, had personalised care plans and could take part in activities and daily tasks. The home was clean and worked with health professionals.
There were some issues to address. All staff on duty could access medicine keys, two walking sticks needed new rubber ends, some bathrooms lacked pedal bins, and one end-of-life care record did not explain health professionals' involvement. The overall Good rating remained unchanged from August 2016.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke highly of staff. Inspectors observed a relaxed, friendly atmosphere and staff respected people's privacy and dignity.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, routines and how they wished to be addressed.
“People's care plans were personalised and had important information relating to their likes and dislikes.” from the report
Activities and independence
People could join activities, go on trips and take part in everyday tasks such as preparing vegetables, folding laundry and walking the dog.
“People had access to a varied activities schedule.” from the report
Good leadership and oversight
The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service. Incidents were reviewed and action was recorded.
“Audits were in place to monitor and check the quality of the service.” from the report
Medicine-key access
needs fixingMedicine keys could be accessed by all staff on duty that day. Inspectors raised this with the registered manager.
“Medicines were stored safely however keys could be accessed by all staff on duty that day.” from the report
Walking-stick safety
needs fixingTwo walking sticks needed their rubber ends replacing. The registered manager said they would review the walking sticks.
“However, we found not all walking sticks were safe as two walking sticks we reviewed required their rubber ends replacing.” from the report
End-of-life records
needs fixingOne person's care plan recorded their wishes but did not explain what visiting health professionals were providing or how often they visited.
“Their care plan confirmed their wishes however there was no information relating to the involvement of the visiting health care professionals.” from the report
Bathroom disposal bins
minorNot all bathrooms had a pedal bin for disposing of paper towels.
“However, we found not all bathrooms had a peddle bin to dispose of the paper towel after use.” from the report
- 01How are medicine keys now controlled, and who can access them during each shift?
- 02Have all walking sticks and other mobility equipment been checked and made safe?
- 03How do you record visits and treatment from health professionals for people receiving end-of-life care?
- 04Have pedal bins been provided in every bathroom?
- 05How will you continue to involve families in care planning, activities and service feedback?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 2019 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 Fig House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 February 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.