Pauline Burnet House

Updated 5 March 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 care homes with outbreaks of coronavirus, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control practice was safe, and the service was compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 05 February and was unannounced.

Updated 5 March 2021

Pauline Burnet House is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care home 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. People with learning disabilities and autism living in the home can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

Pauline Burnet House is registered to accommodate up to nine people with learning disabilities, autistic spectrum disorder and/or physical disability. The home is located on the edge of the city of Cambridge. Shops and other amenities are a short walk from the home.

At our last inspection in July 2016 we rated the home ‘good’. 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 home has not changed since our last inspection.

This inspection was completed on 5 February 2019 and there were nine people living in the home at the time of the inspection.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the home is run. The registered manager understood their responsibilities in relation to notifying CQC of certain events that happened at the home.

People continued to be kept as safe as possible because staff understood their roles and responsibilities in relation to keeping people safe from harm and abuse. Potential risks to people had been recognised and information on how to minimise risks had been recorded as guidance for staff to follow. People received their prescribed medicines, which were managed safely. There were enough staff on duty with the right mix of skills to meet people’s support needs.

People continued to receive an effective service because their needs were met by staff who are well trained and supported to do their job. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home support this practice. People's nutritional needs were met by staff who knew each person's needs well. People’s health and wellbeing was maintained and they had access to a range of health and social care professionals.

People continued to receive good care because staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People had choices in all aspects of their daily lives and could continue with interests, activities and friendships outside the home. Staff ensured people remained as independent as possible.

People continued to receive a service that was responsive. People and their relatives (where agreed) were involved in their personalised support plans and reviews. The information about them in relation to their care and support was up to date. People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities that they enjoyed and were the choice of the person at that time. This helped promote social inclusion. More information was required to support people with end of life care should this ever be needed.

People continued to receive a service that was well led. Quality assurance systems were used to check that the staff provided quality care and the manager made improvements where necessary. People were encouraged to share their views about the quality of the home provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.