The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Victoria Lodge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

59 Victoria Drive, Bognor Regis, West Sussex, PO21 2TQ (01243) 865720

Provided and run by:
Victoria Lodge Limited

All Inspections

10 December 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 10 December 2015 and was unannounced.

Victoria Lodge is a large terraced residential registered with accommodation on two floors. Victoria lodge is registered to provide personal care and accommodation for up to seven people with a learning disability. At the time of our visit there were 3 people residing there.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

We found that people's care needs were assessed and planned for and that staff provided support safely and with consideration for the individuals concerned.

Staff were confident about how to protect people from harm and what they would do if they had any safeguarding concerns.

There were systems in place to make sure that people were supported to take medicines safely and as prescribed. The registered manager had not completed medication audits inline with the company policy.

Risks to people had been assessed and plans put in place to keep risks to a minimum. There were enough staff on duty to make sure people’s needs were met.

Recruitment procedures made sure staff had the required skills and were of suitable character and background. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and that there was good team work.

Staff were supported through training, regular supervisions and team meetings to help them carry out their roles effectively. Staff were supported by an open and accessible management team.

The registered manager and staff were aware of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS are put in place to protect people where their freedom of movement is restricted. The registered manager had taken appropriate action and people were not restricted unnecessarily. Best interest meetings were held where people had limited capacity to make decisions for themselves.

We observed that people’s privacy and dignity respected. Care plans were person centred and showed that individual preferences were taken into account. Care plans gave clear directions to staff about the support people required to have their needs met. People were supported to maintain their health and had access to health services if needed. People’s needs were regularly reviewed and appropriate changes were made to their supportif required.

People’s views were sought and they were encouraged to be involved in the running of the registered and were empowered to be as independent as possible. Staff knew what was important to people and people received care that was individual to them, according to their needs and wishes.

We found there to be an open and transparent culture. Staff felt supported in their roles. Regular checks and audits took place to try to continually improve the service.

27 August 2013

During a routine inspection

There were only two people who received a service at home during our inspection. Due to their complex needs we were unable to hold meaningful conversations with them to find out their views on the service they received. Instead we spent time observing the interactions between the two people and staff who were on duty. We also spoke with two member's of staff. We found that people's care needs were assessed and planned for and that staff provided support safely and with consideration for the individuals concerned.

We spoke with the relatives of two people who received a service and a visiting health professional. Everyone expressed satisfaction with the service provided to people. For example, one person told us, "Staff do their best for people. I've noticed a big difference in my family member, they are so much more confident. They bring out the best in people".

Relatives also expressed satisfaction with the standards of cleanliness at the service, meals provided and with the support their family members received with their medicines.

Everyone that we spoke with said that they felt confident that issues would be resolved if raised with management of the service. A relative told us, "It's important to feel able to talk. I know I can pick up the phone and raise concerns without repercussions".

19 November 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We were unable to talk with people in detail about the care and support they received due to the nature of their disabilities. To help us to understand the experiences people had we spent time indirectly observing what was going on in the service, how people spent their time, the support they received from staff and whether they had positive outcomes. We saw that staff spoke kindly to people when offering support and advice. When people appeared excited and or distressed staff responded appropriately in line with people's behaviour support guidelines.

30 July 2012

During a routine inspection

We were unable to have meaningful conversations with people due to the nature of their disabilities.

To help us to understand the experiences people had we spent time observing what was going on in the home, how people spent their time, the support they received from staff and whether they had positive outcomes.

We spent an hour watching people in the lounge and dining room. Staff spoke kindly to people, seeking their agreement when offering support and advice. However, the majority of interactions were task based despite staff having time for social interaction.

We also spoke with the three staff members who were on duty. Their knowledge of how to support a person who we observed displaying self injurious behaviour varied. Other evidence that we gathered during this inspection confirmed that staff care practices varied when supporting this person and were not in line with the person's planned and recorded delivery of care.

13 January 2012

During a routine inspection

We were unable to have meaningful conversations with people due to the nature of their disabilities.

To help us to understand the experiences people had we spent time observing what was going on in the home, how people spent their time, the support they received from staff and whether they had positive outcomes.

We spent an hour watching people in the lounge and dining room and found that people had positive experiences. The staff assisting them knew what support they needed and they respected their wishes if they wanted to manage on their own.