CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Somerville House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitor controls, PPE, testing, admissions and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed well.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 28 January 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the home’s overall quality.
Inspectors found measures to reduce infection risks for visitors, residents and staff. These included health checks, temperature checks, optional lateral flow tests, a separate visiting pod, regular testing, PPE, quarantine for new admissions and outbreak plans.
The home was marked “Inspected but not rated” for safety. This means the inspection did not give a standard rating for the service or a new overall quality rating.
Visitor infection controls
Visitors completed health checks and had their temperature taken. They were also offered lateral flow tests on arrival.
“Visitors were also offered lateral flow tests (LFT) for the Covid-19 virus on arrival.” from the report
Safer family visits
The separate visiting pod could be reached directly from the garden, reducing the need for visitors to move through the building. Visits were booked and the area was cleaned between appointments.
“The visiting pod was accessed directly from the garden, to avoid visitors moving through the building.” from the report
PPE and testing
Inspectors saw staff using PPE properly. The home had regular COVID testing and enough masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser.
“Staff were seen to be wearing PPE appropriately.” from the report
Plans for outbreaks
The home had a detailed plan for a positive COVID test and contingency plans for an outbreak or other emergency.
“There was a clear and detailed action plan in place in the event of a positive Covid-19 test.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked before entering the home, and are tests still offered?
- 02How are visits arranged and how is the visiting area cleaned between appointments?
- 03What happens if a new resident arrives from hospital or tests positive for COVID-19?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested, and what PPE is available now?
- 05How will the home keep our family informed if there is an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other key questions or give a standard overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 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, April 2019
Somerville House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor improvements suggested.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 March 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care plans, medicine records, staff files and the home's quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated with dignity. Staff understood people's needs, supported their health and offered activities based on their interests.
Staffing had improved since the previous inspection, when care was not always provided promptly in the afternoon. Inspectors found enough staff on duty during this visit. They also found that medicines, risks, complaints and incidents were managed appropriately.
The rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection published on 4 October 2016. Inspectors suggested some further improvements, including using pedal bins, making bath and shower choices clearer, and considering the effect of music on people who found it intrusive.
Caring staff
People were supported by staff who were kind, compassionate and respectful. Staff also built relationships by understanding people's life histories and communication needs.
“People were supported by staff that were caring, compassionate and treated them with dignity and respect.” from the report
Improved staffing
Staffing arrangements had improved since the previous inspection. Inspectors found enough staff to provide timely support and keep people safe.
“At this inspection, there were enough staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans were detailed and up to date. They recorded people's needs, preferences and communication methods, including ways to support people who could not communicate easily.
“People's care plans were detailed and up to date about people's individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Activities and community links
People were encouraged to follow their interests, socialise and take part in outings and activities. The home had links with local groups and organisations.
“People were part of their local community. They visited the local library, went for walks and attended local amateur dramatic events.” from the report
Strong management checks
The management team used audits, surveys, observations and environmental checks to identify improvements. People and relatives were involved through meetings and feedback.
“The service had a range of effective quality monitoring arrangements in place.” from the report
Waste bins
minorInspectors recommended using foot-operated pedal bins to further improve infection control. This was a minor recommendation, not a breach.
“We recommend foot operated pedal bins are used for disposal of waste to further improve infection control measures.” from the report
Bathing choices
minorSome people thought they had to bathe or shower on a set day. The manager said people could choose a different day or bathe more often, but inspectors said people needed to be made more aware.
“People needed to be made more aware of this.” from the report
Music in communal areas
minorA large screen played music throughout the morning. Some people enjoyed it, but others found it intrusive, so inspectors asked the manager to discuss its use with staff.
“A new large screen monitor had recently been installed in the lounge, and was playing music all morning, which some people enjoyed, but others found intrusive.” from the report
Cluttered corridors
minorSome corridors had a lot of equipment stored in them, which made them look cluttered. The provider was aware and planned more storage as part of building work.
“There was a lot of equipment stored in some corridor areas which gave them a cluttered appearance.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure there are enough care staff at busy times and when staff are absent?
- 02Have you installed foot-operated pedal bins, and what other infection control improvements have been made?
- 03How do you explain to each person that they can choose when and how often to have a bath or shower?
- 04How do you decide whether music in shared areas is helpful or intrusive for different people?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned lift access, bathing facilities and dementia-friendly courtyard?
This was an unannounced inspection that considered the overall quality of the care home and rated all five areas; the previous inspection had also rated the service Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 April 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 Somerville House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
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.