Archived: Virginia Lodge Care 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

This key question was previously rated good. This key question remains good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Care planning was person-centred and up to date. People’s care plans fully reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

Care plans were regularly reviewed and people and their relatives consulted on whether changes were needed.

Staff anticipated people’s changing needs well, and when we identified areas for review, they were responsive and keen to ensure people’s records were aligned to the good knowledge staff demonstrated.

One person had experienced particular anxieties around their evening routine, which the deputy manager reviewed and put in place a range of new calming measures. These were based on the person’s known interests and tastes and were highly effective in them enjoying a calmer evening routine.

The environment had seen some improvements but needed further work to ensure it could be best utilised to provide more person-centred care. For instance, having outdoor spaces where people could spend more of their time.

The provider recognised that the provision of activities was not always person-centred, and that the standards of activities had been difficult to maintain.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people, and did their best to ensure care was joined-up, flexible and supported a continuity of care.

People received mostly consistent care from staff who had got to know them well. There had recently been more of a reliance on agency staff, which people and relatives had recognised. One said, “I think it makes it that much more difficult when the experienced staff are having to show someone new – [person] needs time to get to know them.” People and relatives clarified that people’s needs were consistently met, but that they would prefer less reliance on agency staff. One said, “The girls can’t do enough – they go above and beyond to make sure [person] is safe and well looked after.”

Experienced staff had built up good levels of rapport, trust and understanding with people, meaning they were confident and relaxed with people.

Staff understood people’s diverse health and social care needs, which ensured they were more able to help people experience joined up care. Leaders advocated well for people.

People and families raised no concerns about having access to information they needed, when they needed it. They confirmed staff communicated with them well and relatives received regular phone calls or in-person updates.

Leaders and staff worked hard to gather advice from external professionals but at times this was difficult due to wider system issues (such as external triaging approaches and responses to requests from the provider for advice).

The provider recognised the newsletter had not been updated recently, that resident and relative forums had not been well attended and that more could be done to provide up to date, inclusive information to people who used the service and their relatives.

People confirmed it was easy to give feedback about their care and accommodation with the manager and deputy manager regularly on site.” One relative said, “They do listen, and they do everything they can to help.”

People and relatives felt confident they could complain if they had any concerns and had confidence these concerns would be dealt with.

People were supported by staff who understood their needs well. Staff escalated health and wellbeing matters and sought advice regularly. People received the additional health support they needed from a range of external clinicians.

People were able to easily engage with leaders and staff at all levels. They were able to contribute their ideas and raise concerns. People’s views had been regularly sought and listened to.

People’s care plans included some information about what kind of care and support they wanted for when they neared the end of their lives. This needed review and improvement to ensure end of life care planning much clearer. For example, one person’s records were unclear about decision-making at this difficult time. The provider took immediate action to address this.

Relatives we spoke with were clear that the service had supported them and their loved ones well at this difficult time.

The manager and deputy manager broached conversations about people approaching the end of their lives sensitively and practically.