Felix Holme RCH

Updated 16 February 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 23 and 24 January 2019 and the first day of the inspection was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by an inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the information we held about the home, including previous inspection reports. We contacted the local authority to obtain their views about the care provided. We considered the information which had been shared with us by the local authority and other people, looked at notifications which had been submitted. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

During the inspection we reviewed the records of the home. These included three staff recruitment files, training, medicine and complaint records. Accidents and incidents, quality audits and policies and procedures along with information about the upkeep of the premises.

We also looked at five care plans and risk assessments along with other relevant documentation to support our findings. This included ‘pathway tracking’ people living at the home. This is when we check that the care detailed in individual plans matches the experience of the person receiving care. It is an important part of our inspection, as it allows us to capture information about a sample of people receiving care.

During the inspection, we spoke with twelve people who lived at the home, four visitors and ten staff members, this included the provider. We also spoke with a visiting healthcare professional.

We spent time observing people in areas throughout the home and were able to see the interaction between people and staff. We watched how people were being cared for by staff in communal areas. This included the lunchtime meals.

Updated 16 February 2019

We inspected Felix Holme RCH on 23 and 24 January 2019. Felix Holme RCH is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Felix Holme RCH provides accommodation for up to 20 older people in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection 17 people were living there. Some people lived at the home permanently whilst others were there for short stays, for example following a period of ill health. This is known as respite.

People were living with a range needs were associated with old age and frailty. Accommodation is provided over three floors with a passenger lift and stair lift that provides level access to all parts of the home.

There was a registered manager, however they no longer worked at the service, but had not yet de-registered with the Care Quality Commission. The provider was currently managing the service and was in the process of registering with Care Quality Commission to become the registered manager. 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.

Felix Holme RCH had been previously inspected in November 2017 where we found the service was meeting all the regulations. However, we asked the provider to make improvements to achieve a ‘good’ rating. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and a rating of ‘good achieved.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and treated them with kindness, respect and understanding. Staff understood people’s support needs and ensured care provided was person-centred and met people’s individual needs and choices. People were enabled to make decisions and choices about what they did each day and their dignity and privacy was respected. People had enough to do each day. There was an activity programme which people enjoyed participating in as they wished.

There were systems in place to assure quality and safety and to identify if any improvements to the service were needed. The provider had good oversight of the service and what was needed to improve and develop the service. Where improvements were needed work had started to address these.

People’s medicines were ordered, stored administered and disposed of safely. People received their medicines in a way that reflected their personal preferences.

There were enough staff working to provide the support people needed. Recruitment procedures ensured only suitable staff worked at the home. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures. This meant people were protected from the risks of harm, abuse or discrimination.

Staff had a good understanding of the risks associated with the people they looked after. Individual and environmental risk assessments were in place. There provided the guidance staff needed. Fire procedures had been developed to help keep people safe in the event of a fire.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. There was a training programme for staff and they received regular supervision and appraisals.

People were supported to eat and drink a choice of food that met their individual needs and preferences. People’s health and well-being needs were met. They were supported to have access to healthcare services when they needed them.

There was a complaints policy and people told us they would discuss any concerns with the provider or staff. The provider was well thought of and supportive to people and staff. Systems were in place to gather feedback from people and staff and this was used to improve the service.