CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Harborne House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were safe. This included visitor checks, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were safe and well managed.
This was a targeted inspection on 8 December 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes. The visit was announced.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, testing, protective equipment and cleaning safely. They were also assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
The home had an infection control lead who checked staff use of protective equipment and handwashing. Enhanced cleaning schedules covered frequently touched areas at least every four hours, and the registered manager audited the schedules.
Safe visiting arrangements
The home had ordered an outdoor visitor pod so people could spend time with loved ones safely. Visitors had to complete a risk assessment and screening questionnaire before entering.
“The provider had ordered an outdoor visitor pod so people would be able to spend time with loved ones in a safe way.” from the report
Infection control checks
There was a designated infection control lead who observed staff using protective equipment and washing their hands.
“They carried out observations to ensure staff were using Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in line with guidance and carrying out effective handwashing.” from the report
Frequent cleaning
Enhanced cleaning schedules included frequently touched areas at least every four hours. Separate daily, weekly and monthly schedules were audited by the registered manager.
“Enhanced cleaning schedules were in place which included high touch areas at least every four hours.” from the report
Wide infection control measures
Inspectors were assured that the home was meeting infection control requirements across visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment, the premises and outbreak management.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How is the outdoor visitor pod being used now, and how is it cleaned between visits?
- 02How often are staff observed using protective equipment and washing their hands?
- 03How are residents and staff given access to infection testing?
- 04How does the home respond if an infection outbreak occurs?
- 05How are the daily, weekly and monthly cleaning schedules checked and acted on?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the report gives no ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 January 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, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a targeted visit.
Inspectors visited the home on 16 October 2020. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They found that visitors had risk assessments, people could access community activities safely, and staff followed measures to reduce the spread of infection. They were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures.
This inspection did not give an overall quality rating. The safe question was recorded as inspected but not rated. The other four areas were not covered by this visit.
Visitor checks
Visitors were assessed before arriving, helping the manager decide whether visits were necessary.
“All visitors undertook a risk assessment prior to arriving at the home.” from the report
Safe community activities
The home had infection risk assessments to help people continue accessing activities in the community.
“Risk assessments to mitigate cross infection had been completed to enable people to safely access activities within the community.” from the report
Staff clothing
Staff changed their clothing when starting and finishing work to reduce infection risks.
“Staff changed their clothing upon starting and finishing work, to reduce the risk of cross infection.” from the report
Staff training
Staff received specific Covid-19 infection prevention and control training.
“Specific training around infection prevention and control for Covid-19 had been given to staff to promote awareness and reduce anxieties.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently risk assessed before coming into the home?
- 02How do you currently support people to take part in community activities safely?
- 03Do staff still change their clothing at the start and end of each shift?
- 04What infection prevention and control training have staff received since this inspection?
- 05How do you currently manage testing, shielding, social distancing and possible infection outbreaks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not covered. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 November 2020 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 Harborne House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.