CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Victoria House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found suitable staffing, reviewed risk assessments and safe medicine arrangements. Staff had safeguarding training and understood how to report concerns.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had needs assessments and care plans, and staff had relevant training. People had access to healthcare professionals and meals, snacks and drinks suited their choices.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, patient, respectful and attentive. People and families were involved in care planning, and staff respected privacy, dignity and individual preferences.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was based on people's individual needs, preferences and routines. The home provided activities, supported communication needs and recorded people's end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had clear responsibilities, an established manager and regular audits. Staff, residents and families were given opportunities to share their views.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Victoria House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 16 October 2018. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People and relatives said they were happy with the care and felt safe. Inspectors saw staff being kind, patient and respectful.
The home had suitable staffing, safe medicine systems, relevant risk assessments and clean, well-maintained surroundings. Care plans reflected people's needs and choices. The home also supported activities, healthcare access, communication needs and end-of-life wishes.
The home was also rated Good at its previous inspection on 5 May 2016. Inspectors said there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns and that the Good rating remained supported.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being caring, patient and attentive. People were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected.
“We saw staff were caring and attentive. They were polite, respectful, kind and showed genuine compassion to people in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences and needs. People and families were involved in deciding how care should be provided.
“Care plans seen confirmed people and their families had been fully involved in their care planning.” from the report
Safe systems
Risk assessments, staffing arrangements, recruitment checks and medicine systems were in place. The building was clean, maintained and safe.
“We found people's medicines continued to be managed safely by the service.” from the report
Good management
The home had clear leadership and used audits, meetings and surveys to monitor the service and make improvements.
“The service had systems and procedures in place to monitor and assess the quality of their service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you make sure the recently recruited staff member completes care qualification training?
- 02How do you check that medicines remain safely managed for every person living at the home?
- 03What activities would be available if my relative did not want to join the organised group activities?
- 04How would you support my relative's specific communication, mobility or healthcare needs?
- 05How would you record and follow my relative's end-of-life wishes?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the home, care provided and all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 October 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Victoria House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 September 2015.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.