Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at The Recovery Hub

Goodpublished 23 October 2019, 6 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors were assured that PPE, testing, hygiene, social distancing and shielding arrangements were being managed safely. They also found that infection control policies were current and followed by staff.
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.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2020

Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and support to keep people safe during the pandemic.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 November 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control measures as part of a coronavirus pandemic review.

Inspectors found good practice. Staff helped people understand coronavirus risks, supported safe community visits and helped one person receive a family visit. Video calls were also available to help people stay in touch.

Inspectors were assured that personal protective equipment was used safely. They also found regular testing, current infection control guidance, safe visiting arrangements and suitable planning for possible outbreaks.

The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall rating or a rated judgement for the five areas of care.

What inspectors praised
  • Support with coronavirus risks

    Staff helped people understand the risks from coronavirus and the actions they needed to take to stay safe.

    “Staff worked closely with people at the service to educate and support them to understand risks from the Covid 19 virus.” from the report
  • Keeping people connected

    The home supported a family visit for one person and offered video calls to reduce isolation.

    “Visitors could stay in touch with family members and friends on video calls via the services wireless network.” from the report
  • Safe community access

    People were supported to stay safe while going into the community when they wanted to.

    “People were well supported to stay safe and to go to the community when they wanted to.” from the report
  • Prepared infection control arrangements

    The provider had planned ahead and had a full supply of personal protective equipment. Staff were trained and regularly updated.

    “The provider had taken a proactive forward planning approach just before the pandemic began.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you currently support family visits and contact with friends?
  2. 02How often are people living at the home and staff tested for Covid 19 or other infections?
  3. 03How do you make sure staff remain up to date with infection prevention training?
  4. 04How are community outings managed safely now?
  5. 05How do you manage new admissions and possible infection outbreaks?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 December 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2019

Rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support with especially strong leadership.

This was an unannounced planned inspection on 13 September 2019. One inspector spoke with five people, four relatives and six staff. They also reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.

The home supports up to nine people with acute mental health needs. Its aim is to help people recover and move towards more independent living. Inspectors found enough consistent staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training and good links with health professionals.

People were treated with respect and involved in decisions about their care. Inspectors described the home as exceptionally caring and exceptionally well-led. The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good.

This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published in April 2017. The report says CQC will continue to monitor information about the home and may inspect sooner if concerns arise.

What inspectors praised
  • Strong leadership

    Inspectors found the home exceptionally well-led. The manager was visible, approachable and focused on personalised care.

    “The service was exceptionally well-led by a registered manager whose commitment and drive were to deliver an outstanding service.” from the report
  • People feel safe

    People told inspectors they felt safe and said staff treated them well. Risk assessments and emergency plans were in place.

    “People said this was because of how well all the staff treated them.” from the report
  • Skilled, consistent staff

    The home did not use agency staff. Inspectors found enough staff who knew people well and had appropriate training and support.

    “there was a very stable and consistent staff team who were highly skilled and committed.” from the report
  • Choice and independence

    People were involved in their care and supported to develop skills, confidence and independence in ways that suited them.

    “People were fully involved with decisions about their care.” from the report
  • Personalised care

    Staff understood people's individual needs and adapted support to their preferences, communication needs and recovery goals.

    “People were central to the care planning process which was person centred in all ways.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How would you apply the home's recovery approach to my relative's needs and preferences?
  2. 02How do you support someone who chooses not to use the recovery approach?
  3. 03What progress has been made with the planned refurbishment?
  4. 04How are menus being reviewed following feedback from people using the home?
  5. 05What contingency arrangements would be used if my relative became seriously ill, given that the home does not provide end of life care?

This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC areas, including the premises, care and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 October 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of The Recovery Hub

3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at The Recovery Hub →

  2. October 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at The Recovery Hub →

  3. April 2017Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. May 2015Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. December 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. October 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. November 2010

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

40 live-in carers within about an hour of Bristol, City of

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 £1,300 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“She became a good friend to my mother in law, chatting with her, dancing with her, knitting with her and the list goes on”
Nicola B., about Lynnette M.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
Katrina O., about Sekai M.
See live-in carers near Bristol, City ofProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.