CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Roberts Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm. Risk assessments, staffing, recruitment, medicines, infection control and learning from incidents were all judged safe.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found visible and approachable management, clear roles, effective audits and a positive culture focused on people's needs and outcomes.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Roberts Lodge was rated Good; inspectors found people were safe, supported with choice and treated with kindness.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 22 November 2022. One inspector observed care, spoke with the manager and staff, and reviewed care and recruitment records. The inspection was prompted by concerns about how people were supported safely.
Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concern. They found enough trained staff, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems and effective infection control. Staff knew people well and supported their choices, independence and dignity.
The home was also judged Good for being well-led. Managers were visible, staff understood their roles, and the home used audits, reviews and feedback to monitor care. The overall Good rating included the two areas inspected at this visit and the ratings carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make choices and keep as much control and independence as possible. Restrictions were used only when needed to manage distress and risk.
“The service supported people to have as much choice, control and independence as they could.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff understood people's individual needs and protected their privacy and dignity.
“People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Enough suitable staff
The home had enough staff, including support for people needing one-to-one care. A bank of staff was available to cover leave or sickness.
“The service had enough staff, including for one-to-one support for people.” from the report
Active lives and partnerships
People were supported to take part in activities at home and in the community. The home worked with health and social care professionals to support wellbeing.
“People had been supported to improve their oral health, and to participate more in activities in the home and outside” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you provide one-to-one staffing for my relative, and how would cover be arranged if staff were absent?
- 02How do you recognise and respond to my relative's triggers or signs of distress?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's medicines are reviewed and given according to their preferences?
- 04How do you support people to take part in community activities and make everyday choices?
- 05What improvements are included in the service development plan, including any refurbishment of the home?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 December 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, October 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and improvements since earlier safety and leadership concerns.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection by one inspector on 16 September 2021. The inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, personalised care plans, support with health and relationships, and respectful care.
This was the first comprehensive inspection. At the previous inspection, Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement and there were breaches of regulations. Inspectors found the home had improved and was no longer in breach.
Personalised support
Care was planned around individual needs, preferences and communication styles. Staff and managers thought carefully about activities and equipment that would suit each person.
“People were supported in the way they wanted, respecting their human rights and enabling them to live a life like anyone else.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that people were treated as individuals and supported with dignity, privacy and choice.
“People were respected and well treated by staff, who supported them as individuals and with regard to equality and diversity.” from the report
Meaningful activities and relationships
People were supported to visit relatives, go out and develop existing or new interests. The garden and sensory room had been adapted to people's needs.
“People were supported to follow existing interests and find new ones.” from the report
Stable staffing and training
The home had enough staff to meet assessed needs, with recruitment checks and a broad training programme. Inspectors noted a low staff turnover.
“This meant people benefitted from a consistent and stable staff team.” from the report
Improved leadership
The provider had introduced audits, action plans and regular meetings. Inspectors found that earlier concerns about monitoring and governance had been addressed.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
COVID-19 testing misunderstanding
minorA weekly laboratory test had not been completed for staff because guidance had been misunderstood. The manager acted immediately and restarted weekly laboratory testing.
“However, there had been a misunderstanding regarding guidance, which had resulted in a laboratory test not being done each week.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure weekly laboratory COVID-19 testing is completed and recorded now?
- 02How do you keep people's risk assessments and personal emergency evacuation plans up to date?
- 03How are people involved in choosing activities, food and new staff?
- 04How do you review care plans when a person's health or communication needs change?
- 05How can a person or relative make a complaint in an accessible format, and how would you respond?
This was the first comprehensive inspection of the home and covered all five key questions; the previous inspection had rated Safe and Well-led Requires Improvement and found breaches that inspectors said had been addressed. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 October 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.
Every inspection of Roberts Lodge
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2021GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 October 2019.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Southampton
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 £980 to £1,350 a week. 39 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.