CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Robinson House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 April 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic. Nine people were living in the home, which can accommodate up to ten people.
Inspectors found good practice in visitor checks, hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, testing, isolation, cleaning and social distancing. People were supported to keep in touch with family and to take part in activities, including trips outside the home.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide a rating for the overall service or for the full range of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors had health checks, washed their hands and were given protective equipment. The home had enough protective equipment available.
“On arrival at the home visitors had their temperature taken, completed a health questionnaire and declaration, were required to wash their hands” from the report
Testing and isolation
People living in the home and staff were tested regularly. Anyone with symptoms was tested promptly and isolated while waiting for the result.
“Testing was carried out for both people living in the home and staff on a regular basis.” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
Cleaning had increased, including of frequently touched surfaces, and staff knew which cleaning fluids to use.
“Cleaning of the home, including frequently touched surfaces, had increased to reduce the risk of transmission of infection.” from the report
Contact and activities
People were supported to stay in contact with family and friends by video call and to enjoy activities, including trips outside the home.
“People were supported to have regular contact with their families and friends via video calling.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What arrangements are now in place for visitors, and have they changed since the inspection?
- 02How often are people living in the home and staff tested, and what happens if someone has symptoms?
- 03How is personal protective equipment supplied and checked, and what training do staff receive?
- 04How often are frequently touched surfaces cleaned, and which cleaning products are used?
- 05What are the home's current ratings or inspection findings for care areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 June 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, August 2019
Robinson House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the home larger than current best practice guidance.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection on 3 and 5 July 2019. Two inspectors spoke with one person using the service, four staff members and five relatives. They also reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and received kind, respectful care. Staff supported people's choices, communication, health needs and independence. Medicines, staffing, infection control and safeguarding arrangements were judged good.
The home supported people to take part in activities, maintain family relationships and build skills. Leaders checked the quality of the service, acted on issues and asked people and relatives for feedback.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings in all five areas. This was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 8 March 2017. The home was registered for up to 10 people and all 10 places were in use. Inspectors noted that it was larger than current best practice guidance, but said the design and surrounding area reduced the possible negative impact.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found that staff treated people with kindness and compassion while protecting their privacy, dignity and independence.
“People received kind and compassionate care and staff respected people's privacy, dignity and independence.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Staff gave medicines as prescribed, with regular checks by the provider and an external pharmacist. Inspectors also found enough staff to meet people's needs.
“Staff managed medicines safely and gave people their medicines as the prescriber intended.” from the report
Personalised support
Support plans recorded people's preferences, and staff understood how each person communicated and wanted to receive care.
“People had a fully person-centred support plan, which detailed their preferences about the way they wanted to receive care and support.” from the report
Choice and community life
People were supported to choose activities, visit community facilities and maintain relationships with family and friends.
“People had strong links with the local community.” from the report
Learning and oversight
The home reviewed accidents, incidents and other processes. Records showed who was responsible for actions and when they were completed.
“Action plans showed who was responsible for the actions and when they had been completed.” from the report
Larger than current guidance
minorThe home was larger than most domestic-style properties and larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the building design and surrounding homes reduced the negative impact.
“The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties.” from the report
- 01How will you support my relative to make choices and become more independent?
- 02How will staff communicate with my relative if they use signs, gestures, Makaton or another communication method?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough staff when people's needs or activities change?
- 04How will you manage and review my relative's medicines, risks and health appointments?
- 05How does the larger size of the home affect privacy, quiet space and individual choice?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care, premises and management of the home, covering all five CQC questions; all five ratings were reviewed and remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 August 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 Robinson House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 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 Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 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.