You are here

Victoria Care Home Requires improvement

We are carrying out a review of quality at Victoria Care Home. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 12 July 2018

This unannounced inspection took place on 6 June 2018. Victoria Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single packages under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Victoria Care Home is registered to accommodate up to 93 people in two buildings, divided into four units. The Camelot unit provides residential care. Lancelot unit provides residential care to people with dementia. Guinevere unit provides nursing care. Champion Crescent and Flats provide support for people with an alcohol related brain injury. During our inspection, 57 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager at the time of our visit. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 service is run.

At our last inspection in December 2017 we identified improvements were required to ensure the quality and safety of people’s care at the service. For example, people were not always kept safe from abuse or avoidable harm; people rights were not protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and complaints were not always captured or responded to appropriately. We found multiple breaches of Regulations. The service was rated as Inadequate.

This service has been in Special Measures. Services that are in Special Measures are kept under review and inspected again within six months. We expect services to make significant improvements within this timeframe. Following the last inspection, we met with the provider to confirm what they would do and by when to improve the quality and safety of the service. During this inspection the service demonstrated to us that improvements have been made and is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is now out of Special Measures. Following this inspection the service was rated as Requires Improvement.

Risks to people’s health and safety had been assessed. However, further improvements were required to ensure that equipment people needed was provided in a timely manner and sufficient guidance about how to keep people safe was provided to staff. People were supported by sufficient amounts of staff who had been recruited safely. Staff understood their responsibility to protect people from the risk of abuse and what action to take if they suspected abuse. People received their medicines safely and lived in a clean home.

People were supported by staff who received training and support. An assessment of people’s needs was carried out before they moved to the home. People were supported to eat and drink and the advice of external health professionals was sought when needed. People lived in a building which met their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home supported this practice.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff knew people well and took time to understand their needs and wishes. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and had access to independent advocacy. People could be assured that their privacy and dignity were respected by staff.

People received care and support in line with their preferences. Care plans contained guidance for staff about people’s needs and how these should be responded to. A range of activities were provided for people at times to suit them. People were provided with opportunities to make a complaint about their care and complaints were responded to appropriately. Staff were provided with information about how people wished to

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 12 July 2018

The home was not consistently safe

Risks to people’s health and safety had been assessed. However, further improvements were required to ensure that care equipment was provided in a timely manner and clear guidance was provided to staff.

People were supported by sufficient amounts of staff who had been recruited safely.

Staff understood their responsibility to protect people from abuse and what action to take if they suspected abuse.

People received their medicines as required and medicines were managed safely.

People lived in an environment which was kept clean.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 July 2018

The home was effective.

People were supported by staff who received appropriate training and support.

People were supported to eat and drink and the advice of external health professionals was sought when needed.

People lived in a building which met their needs.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home supported this practice.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 July 2018

The home was caring.

People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate.

Staff knew the people well and took time to understand people’s needs and wishes.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and had access to independent professional advocacy.

People could be assured that their privacy and dignity were respected by staff.

Responsive

Good

Updated 12 July 2018

The home was responsive.

People received care and support in line with their preferences. Care plans contained guidance for staff about people’s needs and how these should be responded to.

People were provided with a range of activities at times to suit them.

People were provided with opportunities to make a complaint about their care and complaints were responded to appropriately.

Staff were provided with information about how people wished to be cared for at the end of their lives.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 12 July 2018

The home was not consistently well led.

Improvements had been made to the systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. However, further improvements were required. Provider needs to consistently ensure proactive, timely and sustained improvement.

The provider had complied with conditions of their registration and we had been notified of certain events which had taken place in the home.

People and staff told us the atmosphere of the home had improved and they had opportunities to provide feedback or make suggestions for improvement.

People were complimentary of the management of the home and the improvements made since our last inspection.