Florrie Robbins House

Updated 14 April 2021

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 10 March 2021 and was announced.

Updated 14 April 2021

Florrie Robbins is a ‘care home’ for five people with learning disabilities and/or autism. There were four people living in the home when we visited. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The Care Service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion.

At our last inspection on 10 March 2016 we rated the service as overall ‘good’ with requires improvement under the question of is the service ‘well-led.’. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘good’. Further information is in the detailed findings below. Audits and quality checks had been completed but they had not consistently identified where there were gaps in records. Risks were known by staff but risk assessments needed updating and care plans needed to be reviewed to ensure they contained up to date information about people’s routines.

People were kept safe in the home. Staff knew what signs may indicate abuse and how to report concerns. Staffing levels were good which enabled staff to spend time with people and medication was given and stored safely.

People’s consent was obtained before care and support was given and staff had access to training that was relevant to their role. People were supported to remain healthy by ensuring they had access to external health care professionals and to food they enjoyed.

Staff had developed caring and understanding relationships with the people they supported and knew their routines and preferences well. People’s independence was respected and promoted where possible and staff enjoyed working with people.

People had access to a range of activities in the local community and they enjoyed these along with the times visitors came in to deliver activities in the home. Information such as menus, complaints policy and future care plans were in an accessible format to help people understand information and make choices.

Audits and quality checks had been completed but they had not consistently identified where there were gaps in records. Risks were known by staff but risk assessments needed updating and care plans needed to be reviewed to ensure they contained up to date information about people’s routines.

Staff and relatives were happy with the way the service was being led.