Victoria Mews

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Before people moved into the home, a comprehensive assessment took place with people and their family members to ensure the service could meet their individual requirements and expectations. People and their relatives were involved in their care planning and the service had systems in place to regularly review and update care plans. As part of the review process, staff from all departments discussed people’s individual requirements with them to ensure their needs were being met. For example, staff from laundry, kitchen and maintenance. This helped to ensure people received personalised care and their preferences and choices were met.

Care plans were comprehensive and thorough covering all aspects of people’s care. Where people had complex needs, this was clearly detailed and recorded. For example, people with diabetes, mobility equipment and dietary requirements.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People told us there was a choice of food and drinks throughout the day including fruit. One person told us, “The food is very nice, it changes every day.”. People’s food and fluid intake was monitored using current standards and tools. Staff were aware of people’s specific dietary requirements and consistency. Food and drink was prepared in line with International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) guidance framework.

Care plans were personalised to reflect people’s individual needs and preferences. They included clear guidance on supporting people with nutrition, hydration and the management of long-term health conditions.

The provider’s policies and procedures ensured guidance was in place for staff and relevant training and supervision. This helped to ensure staff could deliver safe and effective care to promote people’s health and wellbeing.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

People and relatives told us their health care needs were met in a timely manner. One person said, “I see the doctor who comes here, I saw him last week.” All relevant staff could access information to ensure they could deliver care appropriately. Staff worked well with external professionals to ensure people received the care they needed, when they needed it.

Healthcare professionals worked well with staff at the service to ensure people’s needs were met which helped to reduce hospital admissions. One healthcare professional told us, “The home is responsive, the continuity of the service is very good.” They went on to tell us, “I feel they know their residents well. We have a mutual trust and understanding, I feel confident in that.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were given a choice of menu and alternatives given when required. For example, one person told us, “They come round about 10am and ask what you want. I like soup, I have it every day, I get a choice.” Staff were aware of dietary needs and prepared meals accordingly. A relative told us, “They keep me up to date with any health changes. My relative had a couple of hospital visits to do with chest infections.”

There was a range of activities available to people which included external services who provided group activities. One staff member told us, “I make sure I am supporting people to do what they want to do. I monitor the engagement of activities on the app. If people are not engaged, we would not do that activity. People who live here love singing.” This demonstrated people’s wishes were considered and activities tailored to their wants and needs.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People told us they had access to a range of activities. One person said, “I have done some activities, they do talks. One staff member gave us examples of how they supported a person with exercises after they refused support from the physiotherapist because of their gender. They told us, “[The person] has stopped dragging their foot… They smile when I come to do the exercises… and they told me they were proud”.

The provider had a good oversight of people’s needs. People had regular weight and health management checks. The registered manager told us a holistic approach was taken to meet people’s health and wellbeing to ensure what they achieved was meaningful. For example, people’s interactions and moods were regularly monitored. If a person was unable to verbalise, they discussed this with the person’s representative.

Systems were in place to ensure people’s care and support was recorded and maintained accurately.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People were involved in their care planning and asked about their consent to care and their decisions recorded. Where people lacked capacity, the provider worked with advocates and representatives in line with The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

One person told us, “They let me choose what I want to do.” A staff member said, “I support people to make their own decisions and give them plenty of choices.”

We observed staff seeking consent from people before care was delivered.