• Care Home
  • Care home

Valkyrie Lodge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

27 Valkyrie Road, Westcliff On Sea, Essex, SS0 8BY (01702) 302642

Provided and run by:
S B Care Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Valkyrie Lodge is a care home providing personal care to people who require support with their mental health. At the time of our inspection there were 6 people receiving care. The assessment took place on the 8 April to 10 April 2024. The assessment was carried out to follow up on previous breaches. We found care plans were now more detailed to mitigate risks to people. Staff training had improved, and recruitment processes were being followed. Some improvements were still needed with governance systems, the general oversight of the service and how improvements were implemented. The overall environment of the service needed to be updated and made more homely for people.

12 September 2023

During a routine inspection

About the service

Valkyrie Lodge is a care home providing personal care to people who require support with their mental health. At the time of our inspection there were 5 people receiving care. The service is set in the community in an adapted building over 3 floors with a garden.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People we spoke with were happy living at the service and felt supported by staff.

We have made recommendation in relation to safeguarding, staff training and support and recruitment processes.

Care and treatment was not recorded in detail or in a person centred way to provide safe support to people. Care plans and risk assessments did not contain enough guidance to staff to mitigate risks to people. More robust recruitment practices needed to be implemented in line with the providers policies. Improvements were needed with medicine documentation and evidence if staff were competent to safely administer medicines.

Care documentation needed to be more person-centred and regularly updated to ensure people received the correct care and support. Staff required more frequent training to keep them up to date with best practice. Nutritional assessments should be in place to ensure people had the correct level of support with nutrition and hydration.

The registered manager needed to keep themselves and staff up to date with best practice guidance to ensure people living at the service were empowered and had positive outcomes. Better governance systems needed to be implemented to monitor and improve care delivery.

There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection and to learn lessons from accidents and incidents.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were supported to access healthcare from other professionals such as the GPs and mental health services.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at the last inspection was good (published 30 January 2018). The rating at this inspection has changed to requires improvement.

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Enforcement

We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

3 January 2018

During a routine inspection

Valkyrie Lodge provides accommodation for up to six people who are living with mental health issues. There were five people living in the service on the day of our inspection. The service is located in a converted house that is central to community amenities.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

The service was safe. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. There were systems in place to minimise the risk of infection. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people to meet their needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to eat and drink enough as to ensure they maintained a balanced diet.

The service was caring. Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence and to treat people with respect and dignity.

The service was responsive. People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and also when there was a change in care needs. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The registered manager responded to complaints received in a timely manner.

The service was well-led. The service had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.

15 December 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 15 December 2015.

Valkyrie Lodge provides accommodation for up to six people who are living with mental health issues. There were six people living in the service on the day of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

Staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s assessed needs safely. Staff were well trained and supported. There were sufficient staff who had been recruited safely to ensure that they were fit to work with people.

People told us that they felt safe and comfortable living at Valkyrie Lodge. Staff had a good understanding of how to protect people from the risk of harm. They had been trained and had access to guidance and information to support them in maintaining good practice.

Risks to people’s health and safety had been assessed and the service had support plans and risk assessments in place to ensure people were cared for safely. People received their medication as prescribed and there were safe systems in place for receiving, administering and disposing of medicines.

The registered manager and staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) but had not had the need to make any applications. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that as far as possible people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. DoLS are a code of practice to supplement the main Mental Capacity Act 2005. These safeguards protect the rights of adults by ensuring that if there are restrictions on their freedom and liberty these are assessed by appropriately trained professionals.

People were supported to have sufficient amounts of food and drink to meet their needs. People’s care needs had been assessed and catered for. The support plans provided staff with good information about how to meet people’s individual needs, understand their preferences and how to care for them safely. The service monitored people’s healthcare needs and sought advice and guidance from healthcare professionals when needed.

Staff were kind and caring and treated people respectfully. People participated in activities of their own choice that met their needs. Families were made to feel welcome and people were able to receive their visitors at a time of their choosing. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to deal with any complaints or concerns.

4 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We gathered evidence to help us answer our five questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

The detailed evidence supporting our summary can be read in our full report.

Is the service safe?

We saw that people were safe and were consenting to their treatment. The home had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards although there were no current applications needed to be submitted. The appropriate staff had been trained and knew when to submit an application. This meant that people were safeguarded as required.

The service was safe, clean and hygienic and there were appropriate infection control policies in place. Staff were trained and supported with the correct skills to provide care to people.

Is the service effective?

People told us they could contact an advocate if needed. This meant people had independent support when required. People were involved in planning their care needs and this enabled them to maintain their independence.

Is the service caring?

We saw that people were relaxed in the company of each other and staff. We saw that staff were attentive to people's needs. Staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate they knew people well. One person told us: "I love it here, I have fallen on my feet."

We saw that people were invited twice a year to complete a satisfaction survey which was discussed in community meetings with people and with staff. This told us people were involved in their care and environment.

Is the service responsive?

People were supported to pursue their own interests and hobbies including joining the library, attending yoga and leisure trips in the community. People told us they could talk to the manager if they had a complaint. We saw there were regular community meetings where people could discuss any concerns and the running of the home.

Is the service well-led?

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided. We saw staff had regular meetings and supervision with management to discuss the running of the service. Staff told us they felt supported and had received adequate training.

3 May 2013

During a routine inspection

When we visited four people were using the service and we had the opportunity to talk with them all. They told us the care was good and that there was enough who gave them support. Their comments included, 'Staff are very polite.' 'The support is adequate. I've got no problems at all.' 'It's a good place.'

We looked at three care plan files and found that people's individual needs had been considered and plans detailed the support required. We found that there were systems in place to gain people's consent to care and treatment.

We also found systems in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision however some systems were lacking regarding cleanliness and infection control procedures.

19 November 2012

During a routine inspection

Four people we spoke to told us they felt happy and safe living at the home.

A person told us, 'The home is good and the best place I could come to.' Another person said that staff, 'are all approachable and professional.' A person told us, 'If you want to do something, they [staff] help you.'

During our inspection we saw that people received good care and that staff treated them with respect. We found that staff were trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and worked in ways that kept people safe.

We found that people were cared for by staff that were supported to deliver care and treatment safely to an appropriate standard. Not all quality assurance systems in place were effective in monitoring and improving the service.