The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Cobalt Health

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

Cheltenham Imaging Centre, Linton House Clinic, Thirlestaine Road, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL53 7AS (01242) 535910

Provided and run by:
Cobalt Health

All Inspections

During an assessment of Diagnostic and screening services

We carried out an unannounced, comprehensive two-day assessment on 18 and 19 March with follow up remote interviews on 26 March 2026.

We carried out the assessment as the provider had not been inspected fully under our new methodology, although we did carry out a responsive, focussed inspection in 2024 where the service was rated Good in all key questions except responsive which was rated Outstanding.

Safe:

The service had an excellent learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly and sought new ways to identify themes and trends. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.

Effective:

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice and where possible, research conducted by the service led to real, positive changes in practice. People always had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

Caring:

People were always treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. Staff went above and beyond to ensure where possible, all patients received the best imaging possible, and supported them, alongside other partners, such as GPs, to achieve this. People had choice in their care. Staff responded to people in a timely way. The service supported and provided extensive staff wellbeing initiatives.

Responsive:

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service viewed all patient feedback as an opportunity to learn and improve. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. The service also provided free cancer scans to those who needed them. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

Well-led:

Leaders and staff had a clear, shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Leaders made sustainability and future planning to ensure the viability of the service was a top priority. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Governance and risk management was understood and comprehensive. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were very receptive to new ideas and actively sought to develop and enhance services where they saw gaps. There was a strong culture of continuous improvement with staff empowered and given time and resources to try new ideas.

We did not identify any breaches of regulation during our assessment.

During an assessment of the hospital overall

We carried out an unannounced, comprehensive assessment on 18 and 19 March with follow up remote interviews on 26 March 2026. The assessment looked at Diagnostic imaging which we have rated as Outstanding.

We carried out the assessment as the provider had not been inspected fully under our new methodology, although we did carry out a responsive, focussed inspection in 2024 where the service was rated Good in all key questions except responsive which was rated Outstanding.

Cobalt Health provides diagnostic imaging services to patients across Gloucester, Hereford and Worcester as part of their 3 counties NHS contract. Cobalt health also provides Community Diagnostic Centre (CDC) imaging at both the Gloucester CDC and Dudley CDC. Cobalt also provides lung screening services across Manchester, Hull, North Lincoln and Goole, and Luton and Thurrock. The service also provides a small number of scans privately.

The Cobalt Imaging Centre in Cheltenham opened in 2006. The centre provides Positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET/CT) (a nuclear medicine technique), Computed Tomography (CT), 1.5 T and 3.0 T Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (medical imaging technique used in radiology to form pictures of the anatomy and the physiological processes of the body), ultrasound and digital radiography. The service also provides a fleet of 14 mobile MRI and CT scanners plus 1 relocatable and 1 mobile PET/CT scanner which were located in various regions across the UK.

Between January 2025 and December 2025, across all sites, Cobalt Health provided 90280 scans across all modalities.

The service provides diagnostic imaging services for people over the age of 18 plus some limited services for children under the age of 18. Between May 2025 and April 2026, the service performed 380 scans for children, which equated to 0.004% of imaging done overall.

We visited the clinical imaging centre in Cheltenham and The Gloucester Quays community diagnostic centre.

Cobalt Health also provides consultation rooms for orthopaedic surgeons and neurologists to facilitate a one-stop service for outpatients, with diagnostic imaging carried out during the consultation.

Cobalt Health has another registered location in Birmingham called The Institute of Translational Medicine Imaging Centre at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH). This has its own registration and was not inspected as part of this assessment. This service was last inspected in June 2022 and rated Requires Improvement.

During an assessment of Diagnostic imaging

Date of assessment 11 March to 28 March. We undertook the assessment following information received from staff on the restructuring of personnel for the service.

We assessed a total of 5 quality statements from the safe, 2 quality statements from caring and 3 from well-led and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the key question ratings from the last inspection.

Through assessing these 10 quality statements, our overall rating remains good.

We found that the provider had clear safeguarding processes that staff were aware of. The environment was clean and well maintained with good infection, prevention and control practices. Machinery and equipment used in the location was maintained to a high standard and a safety first culture was promoted.

We saw evidence that patients' needs and preferences were included in the planning of treatment and the service performed allergy and safety checks.

Staff we spoke with stated that they felt supported and respected and there was a strong emphasis on training, developing skills and participation in research. There were human resources process in place to ensure new starters were appropriately trained and experienced. There was management overview of skill mix and numbers of staff to ensure the safe running of the service.

Leaders provided responses to feedback and staff stated that they felt listened to. Governance processes included the availability of a freedom to speak up guardian and staff stated that they felt involved in the management of the company. Leaders were described as visible and approachable.

During an assessment of the hospital overall

Date of assessment 11 March to 28 March. We undertook the assessment following information received from staff on the restructuring of personnel for the service. We assessed a total of 5 quality statements from the safe, 2 quality statements from caring and 3 from well-led and found areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the key question ratings from the last inspection. Through assessing these 10 quality statements, our overall rating remains good We found that the provider had clear safeguarding processes that staff were aware of. The environment was clean and well maintained with good infection, prevention and control practices. Machinery and equipment used in the location was maintained to a high standard and a safety first culture was promoted. We saw evidence that patients' needs and preferences were included in the planning of treatment and the service performed allergy and safety checks. Staff we spoke with stated that they felt supported and respected and there was a strong emphasis on training, developing skills and participation in research. There were human resources process in place to ensure new starters were appropriately trained and experienced. There was management overview of skill mix and numbers of staff to ensure the safe running of the service. Leaders provided responses to feedback and staff stated that they felt listened to. Governance processes included the availability of a freedom to speak up guardian and staff stated that they felt involved in the management of the company. Leaders were described as visible and approachable.

9, 10 and 17 July 2019

During a routine inspection

Cobalt Health is operated by Cobalt Health and provides services to patients across Gloucester, Hereford and Worcester. The Cobalt Imaging Centre in Cheltenham opened in 2006. The centre provides Positron emission tomography–computed tomography (PET/CT) (a nuclear medicine technique), Computed Tomography (CT), Cone Beam Computed Tomography (Cone beam computed tomography is a medical imaging technique consisting of X-ray computed tomography where the X-rays are divergent, forming a cone), 3.0T Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) (medical imaging technique used in radiology to form pictures of the anatomy and the physiological processes of the body), high field open MRI, ultrasound and digital radiography. The service also provides a fleet of six mobile MRI scanners and one mobile CT scanner which are located in various regions across the UK. Cobalt Health also provides consultation rooms for orthopaedic surgeons to facilitate a one-stop service for outpatients, with diagnostic imaging carried out during the consultation.

The service provides diagnostic imaging services for patients over the age of 18.

We visited the clinical imaging centre in Cheltenham and six mobile units. Cobalt Health also provides a satellite service at The Institute of Translational Medicine Imaging Centre at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH) in Birmingham. This is a satellite MRI facility supporting a wide range of research and clinical service for the QEH. However, this location was not inspected during this inspection as it was recently inspected in January 2019 and rated good.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 9, 10 and 17 July 2019.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Services we rate

We rated it as Good overall.

  • The service provided mandatory training in key skills. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so.
  • The risk of infection was managed well. Staff used equipment and control measures to protect patients, themselves and others from infection. They kept equipment and the premises visibly clean. The design, maintenance and use of facilities and premises kept people safe.
  • Staff completed and updated risk assessments for each patient and removed or minimised risks.
  • There were sufficient numbers of staff with the necessary skills, experience and qualifications to meet patients’ needs. The service made sure staff were competent for their roles. Managers appraised staff’s work performance.
  • The service managed patient safety incidents well. Staff recognised and reported incidents and near misses. Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service.
  • The service provided care and treatment based on national guidance and evidence-based practice. Managers checked to make sure staff followed guidance.
  • Staff monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment in line with contractual arrangements with commissioners. The service had been accredited under relevant clinical accreditation schemes.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, provided emotional support to patients, and supported and involved patients, families and carers to understand their condition and make decisions about their care and treatment.
  • The service planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of local people and the communities served. It also worked with others in the wider system and local organisations to plan care. People could access the service when they needed it and received the right care promptly. Waiting times from referral to treatment and arrangements to admit, treat and discharge patients were exceeding national standards.
  • Leaders had the integrity, skills and abilities to run the service. They understood and managed the priorities and issues the service faced. They supported staff to develop their skills and take on more senior roles.
  • Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.
  • All staff were committed to continually learning and improving services. They had a good understanding of quality improvement methods and the skills to use them. Leaders encouraged innovation and participation in research.

However, we found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • Patient group directions used by the service did not have the required authorisation as recommended by national guidance.
  • Risk assessments were not always documented to provide an audit trail behind the rational for the decision.
  • Daily cleaning records were not maintained to demonstrate cleaning had taken place.
  • There was limited documentation regarding additional patient care carried out by the service.
  • Further work around audit was required as there was not always a formal process to identify the actions required to make the necessary improvements where audits had not met required targets.
  • There were limited risks associated with children attending the service on the risk register.
  • We were not assured that risks were being regularly reviewed and discussed and that mitigating actions were being acted on. It was unclear whether actions associated with risk mitigation had been completed and implemented.
  • Meeting minutes did not always identify the depth and detail behind discussions held.
  • There was no evidence to demonstrate that recommendations from the staff survey had been acted on or implemented.

We also found areas of outstanding practice:

  • Staff worked closely with the referring NHS trust to carry out additional scans when significant findings were identified. This prevented patients from having to return to the service for additional scans which could lead to a delay in accessing treatment.
  • The provider offered 800 free scans to support the local NHS trust to meet demand and ensure timely diagnostic scans for patients.
  • Cobalt Health provided facilities free of charge for the local NHS trust to carry out ‘one stop’ clinic for patients referred for musculoskeletal complaints. Patients could receive scans and advice or treatment without the need for further waiting to attend for scans.
  • Cobalt Health provided facilities free of charge to accommodate a breast screening service provided by the local NHS trust to help them meet demand.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with two requirement notices. Details are at the end of the report.

11 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with eight patients before and after they had their scans. We also observed patients attending the centre for a scan. We talked with seven staff. They said they were treated with dignity, respect and sensitivity. One patient told us "they treat me as an individual, not as a number".

We found that comprehensive records noted the patients journey from referral to treatment and discharge. Patients told us "it's a brilliant service" and "wonderful, a good system".

Well developed systems were in place to prevent and control infections both in the centre and in mobile units. Patients' surveys recorded 100% satisfaction with the cleanliness of the centre.

The radiation equipment was specially designed, installed, maintained and used in a safe and suitable manner such that patients, staff and visitors are all suitably protected.

Staff were supported to maintain and improve their skills, knowledge and experience. They had access to local, national and international training delivered at the centre providing mandatory and clinical lectures, workshops and training. Patients told us, "staff are brilliant, all of them".

The service was committed to obtain the views of patients, their representatives and staff as part of their quality assurance system. The management team had a range of auditing tools to monitor performance and strived towards ongoing improvement and the highest standards of service.