Victoria House

At the last inspection carried out on 05 May 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. 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.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

People who lived at the home told us they were safe, well cared for and enjoyed living at the home. Comments received included, “I am really well looked after and feel completely safe.” And, “I am looked after really well by caring and conscientious staff.”

Relatives spoken with during the inspection told us they were happy with the care provided and had no concerns about their family members safety. Comments received included, “I am very happy with [relatives] care. They are treated with respect and dignity by staff.” And, “We think the home is absolutely brilliant. The staff are fantastic, they have the patience of saints.”

Throughout the inspection we observed staff being kind and attentive to people in their care. We saw they were caring, patient and engaged people in conversation whilst providing their support. We saw staff were always in attendance and available when people needed their help.

Procedures were in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs. All staff except one recently recruited staff member had achieved national care qualifications. The registered provider told us the new staff member would soon be undertaking their care qualification training.

The service had sufficient staffing levels in place to provide support people required. People had support to enable them to pursue activities of their choice.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required.

People’s care and support had been planned with them and was person centred. They told us they had been consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered. Care plans were organised and had identified care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received.

We saw there was an emphasis on promoting dignity, respect and independence for people supported by the service. They told us they were treated as individuals and received person centred care.

We observed the daily routines and practices within the home and found people were treated equally and their human rights were constantly being respected.

We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.

The design of the building and facilities provided were appropriate for the care and support provided.

The service had safe infection control procedures in place and staff had received infection control training.

Meal times were relaxed and organised around people’s individual daily routines. People told us they enjoyed the quality and choice of meals provided for them.

People were supported to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met.

People told us staff were caring towards them. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of high standards of care to give people meaningful lives.

The service had information about support from an external advocate should this be required by people they supported.

The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people and their family when they commenced using the service. The people we spoke with told us they were happy with the service and had no complaints.

The registered manger used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits and satisfaction surveys to seek their views about the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Victoria House provides accommodation and personal care for up to 12 older people. The home is situated in a residential area of Poulton-le-Fylde and is close to shops and local amenities.

Victoria House is well served by public transport, being on a bus route and close to the railway

station. There are two lounges and a dining area situated on the ground floor, with individual bedrooms on the ground and first floors. A stair lift is in place for ease of access to the upper floor.

The home has a manager who is registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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 the time of the inspection there were 12 people living at the home.

People told us they were happy living at Victoria House and the care met their individual needs. We were told, “If you are ill you’re really looked after.” And, “They go the extra mile and more.” People described staff as, “caring.” And, “kind and helpful.” People who lived at the home told us they were involved in their care planning.

There were systems in place to protect people at risk of harm and abuse. Staff were able to define abuse and the actions to take if they suspected people were being abused.

We found individual risk assessments were carried out and care plans were developed to document the measures required to reduce risk. Staff were knowledgeable of the measures and we observed these were followed these to ensure people’s safety was maintained.

We found medicines were managed safely. We saw people were supported to take their medicines in a dignified manner. We found medicines were stored securely.

We found appropriate recruitment checks were carried out. This helped ensure suitable people were employed to work at the home. We found there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People were supported in a prompt manner and people told us they had no concerns with the availability of staff.

Staff received regular support from the management team to ensure training needs were identified. There was a forward training plan in place and staff told us they could access training as required.

Processes were in place to ensure people’s freedom was not inappropriately restricted and staff told us they would report any concerns to the registered manager.

We found people were offered a variety of foods and people told us they liked the meals at Victoria House.

People were referred to other health professionals for further advice and support when assessed needs indicated this was appropriate. People told us they were supported to access other health professionals as required.

Our observations during the inspection showed staff treated people with respect and kindness. People told us they considered staff were caring and we saw a positive rapport between staff and people who lived at the home.

Staff knew the likes and dislikes of people who lived at the home and delivered care and support in accordance with people’s expressed wishes. People told us staff knew them well and were gentle and thoughtful if they needed help.

There was a complaints policy which was understood by staff. Information on the complaints procedure was available in people’s private rooms for people to access as they wished.

We found systems were in place to identify if improvements were required. Quality assurance checks were carried out to monitor the service provided.

People who lived at the home were offered the opportunity to complete surveys and meetings were available for people to participate in. People and relatives also told us they found the registered manager and registered provider approachable if they wished to discuss any matters with them.