Archived: Victoria House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Staff recognised that people’s individuality was important and so supported them to make their own decisions. Where people’s care needs changed, staff and the management team discussed options with them and involved relevant external professionals as required.

Care plans were updated and any changes were shared with staff to ensure people received the care they needed.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Records demonstrated how staff and the management team worked flexibly with other services and professionals to meet people’s care and support needs. People and relatives told us they were kept up to date and were involved in their care and any external appointments or visits from professionals. One person said, “Staff always remind me when I have an appointment coming up. They let me know when the dentist is coming too.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Guidance was available in people's care plans which documented how people communicated. Information was accessible and was made available in a way to promote the involvement of the person. Records gave guidance about people’s daily routines if they could not tell staff themselves. People were consulted individually, and meetings took place with people and families to obtain feedback about people's experiences.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider had an established system in place for the management of complaints. We found complaints had been taken seriously and where there had been a shortfall of the standards expected, this was acknowledged. The registered manager had investigated complaints and provided written responses to complainants. This included a follow up process to ensure people were satisfied with the outcome provided to them. The registered manager then ensured any lessons learned were shared with the staff team to improve the quality of care provided.

Regular meetings took place for people and relatives to share their views and receive updates about changes at the service.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People had access to services such as opticians, healthcare professionals, nurses, dieticians and speech and language therapists (SALT) when needed. People were supported to attend hospital appointments and the management team gathered relevant information about people’s health or medical needs to ensure care provided met their current needs. Where people were unable to express their views and did not have support from family members, advocacy services were involved to ensure any barriers to care were removed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Policies and procedures were in place in relation to equity, equality and diversity. Feedback and observations supported the fact that staff had implemented learning, and a culture had been created of individualised care. People’s care records showed how staff ensured people’s human rights and protected characteristics were included and protected. Care plans included information around people’s identity and what was important to them.

Staff knew how to ensure people’s rights were protected and there was an inclusive and supportive atmosphere in the home, no matter what health or dementia related needs people had. Staff ensured people who could not advocate for themselves had good experience of care

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People’s care plans included information about their expressed wishes in relation to the care they wanted to receive as they approached the end of their lives. The registered manager and staff shared with us how they had previously supported people in line with their wishes and preferences. This ensured people were treated with dignity at the end of their lives.

A staff member told us, “We have annual training given for end of life and it helped a lot with the skills I have for my role. A good end of life care is where pain is managed well and to give spiritual/emotional support to the resident and family respecting their preferences.”