Victoria Court

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to safety concerns, reported incidents appropriately, and ensured that learning from these events informed ongoing improvements.

People using the service and their relatives understood how to raise concerns or make a complaint and were familiar with the complaint’s procedure. One relative said, “If I wasn't happy with something I know I could talk to [the registered manager] and her team.”
The provider had effective systems for managing complaints and safety issues. The registered manager maintained oversight of all incidents to identify trends and implement actions to reduce risks.

Staff were supported to record and report incidents through clear processes. The registered manager promoted openness through an open‑door policy and regular team meetings, where accidents, incidents, and opportunities for improvement were routinely discussed.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Staff followed established procedures to support effective handovers when people were admitted to hospital. Relevant information about each person’s needs was shared with paramedics and hospital staff to maintain consistent and safe care.

The team collaborated with healthcare professionals, including GP's and specialist practitioners, to monitor people’s health conditions and respond promptly to any changes in their support needs. One visiting professional told us, “The manager and deputy manager are always accessible and responsive to any queries, as are the senior staff and carers.” Another visiting professional said, “When I have discussed changes needed for wound care this has been acted upon straight away by managers and seniors.”

Where people had diagnosed health conditions, clear risk assessments guided staff on how to support them safely. The provider remained responsive to changing needs and made timely referrals to healthcare professionals when required.

The provider engaged with people and healthcare partners to understand what safety meant to them and how best to achieve it. Staff focused on improving people’s lives while upholding their right to live free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm, and neglect. Concerns were shared promptly and appropriately with relevant professionals.

Staff were trained in safeguarding, understood local procedures, and were confident in recognising and reporting concerns. People felt they received safe care. Staff prioritised individuals’ rights and safety while supporting their quality of life.

Potential safeguarding incidents were thoroughly investigated and reported to the local authority and the Care Quality Commission, helping to maintain people’s safety and wellbeing.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were applied to ensure decisions were made in people’s best interests. People at Victoria Court did not experience unnecessary restrictions.
 

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

We observed staff working safely and helping people with any equipment they used in a safe manner. One person told us, “They [the staff] are always very careful with me. They know what they are doing.” Staff were kept informed about any risks and changes through regular handovers and updated care plans. Risks associated with people’s health care conditions were discussed with them. Where people chose not to follow the advice of health care professionals, their decision making was recorded and respected.

The provider took a holistic approach to understanding and managing risk. Staff delivered safe, personalised care that supported people to live in a way that was meaningful to them.
We observed staff using equipment safely and assisting people in a competent manner. One person told us, “Staff are trained well. I always feel safe.” Risks related to people’s health conditions were discussed with them. Staff were kept up to date on risks and any changes through regular handovers and updated care plans.
 

The provider effectively identified and managed environmental risks. Equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Relatives reported no concerns about the environment, and staff confirmed that robust systems were in place to manage risks and promote a culture of safety.

The environment was well maintained, clean, and free from trip or slip hazards. Regular health and safety audits ensured that potential risks were consistently monitored and addressed.

The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of qualified and experienced staff who received appropriate support, supervision and ongoing development. Staff worked effectively as a team to deliver safe, person‑centred care.

Staffing levels were organised to meet people’s needs. People told us there were enough staff available and that they received timely support. One person said, “The staff are very good. They answer my call bell quickly and don’t keep me waiting.” We observed staff regularly checking on people and responding promptly when assistance was required.

People and their relatives reported that staffing levels were sufficient to meet their needs. Staff demonstrated confidence in their roles and a clear understanding of their responsibilities. They also confirmed they received ongoing training and regular supervision, which they described as supportive and beneficial.

Recruitment processes were robust. Records showed that all required pre‑employment checks had been completed to ensure suitable individuals were appointed.

The provider effectively assessed, managed, and mitigated infection risks, taking prompt action to prevent and control potential spread and reporting concerns to relevant agencies when necessary. Staff consistently adhered to infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures in line with current guidance. During the inspection, we observed staff completing cleaning tasks as required, maintaining a safe and hygienic environment.

Staff had access to appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and demonstrated correct usage. Feedback from staff, people using the service, and relatives indicated no concerns regarding infection control practices. One relative told us, “When it is needed the staff use gloves and aprons. My relative has chest infections and the staff will use PPE to protect my relative. There are masks and hand gel for visitors at the entrance.” Good food hygiene standards were evident, and staff had completed training in both IPC and food safety.

The provider ensured that medicines and treatments were safe and appropriate for each person’s needs, abilities, and preferences. Staff involved people in planning their care, including when changes were required.

People received their medicines as prescribed, including pain relief administered in accordance with healthcare professionals’ guidance. Staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines safely and understood the procedures for reporting and managing medication errors. During the inspection, staff were observed administering medicines calmly and, in a person‑centred manner, supporting individuals to take them in their preferred way and at their own pace. One relative confirmed, “The staff help my relative with his medication and always ensure they’ve taken it. When my relative has been unwell the nurse or doctor have been to see them and go through their medication with me before making any changes.”

Medicines were stored securely, with regular checks to ensure storage temperatures remained safe. Medicines subject to additional controls were handled in line with relevant regulations. Stock levels were accurate based on sample checks completed during the inspection.

Medication Administration Records (MAR) were completed correctly and demonstrated that people received their medicines at the appropriate times. Regular audits were carried out to ensure ongoing oversight of medicines management.