Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Priory Group

Victoria House

82 Albert Road, Farnborough, GU14 6SL

Goodpublished 9 November 2023, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Fire door work had been completed, risks were monitored, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff to support people safely.
Effective?
Good
This key question was not inspected during this visit, so no new rating was given in the report.
Caring?
Good
This key question was not inspected during this visit, so no new rating was given in the report.
Responsive?
Good
People's care, communication, activities and rehabilitation were arranged around their needs and preferences. Inspectors found that specialist therapy support had improved since the previous inspection.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found more stable leadership, improved communication and effective systems for monitoring quality, risks and improvement.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, November 2023

Rated Good; inspectors found safer care, better rehabilitation support and stronger management after the previous Requires Improvement rating.

Inspectors visited the home without notice on 11 July 2023. They spoke with 10 people, three relatives and six staff. They observed care and therapy sessions and checked care plans, medicines, fire safety, recruitment and management records.

The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found improvements had been made and sustained since the previous inspection, including better fire safety, enough specialist staff for rehabilitation and more stable management.

People were supported with personal care, daily activities and therapies. Inspectors found effective systems for managing risks, medicines, safeguarding, infection control, complaints and learning from incidents.

This was not a full inspection of all five key questions. For questions not inspected, the previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating.

What inspectors praised
  • Specialist rehabilitation

    The home had the specialist staff needed to provide a fuller rehabilitation service, including occupational therapy, physiotherapy, psychology and neurological speech and language therapy.

    These included occupational therapists, physiotherapists, psychologists and a neurological speech and language therapist.from the report
  • Risk management

    Individual risks, including falls, pressure injuries and seizures, were assessed and reviewed regularly. Fire safety improvements identified at the previous inspection had been completed.

    The provider had maintained an effective system to identify, assess, monitor and manage individual risks arising from people's conditions and choices.from the report
  • Personalised support

    Therapy and daily care reflected people's needs, choices and communication preferences. People were supported to take part in activities and maintain contact with family.

    Our observations and discussions with staff showed people's therapy sessions were arranged to meet their needs, respected their choices, and were in line with current standards and good practice.from the report
  • Stronger leadership

    Inspectors found greater stability, better communication and improvements that had been maintained since the previous inspection.

    The registered manager had introduced a period of stability, which had improved staff morale, and communications with staff, people who used the service, and their families.from the report
  • Learning from incidents

    The home recorded and reviewed accidents, incidents and near misses. Learning was shared with staff and used to reduce the risk of harm happening again.

    The provider continued to operate an effective online system to learn from incidents, accidents and near misses.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Fire door certification

    minor

    The necessary fire door work had been completed, but at the time of the inspection the provider was still seeking checks and certification. Families may want to confirm that this was completed.

    At this inspection, the necessary works had been completed and the provider was seeking to have the fire doors checked and certified.from the report
  • Continued recruitment

    minor

    There were enough staff to support people safely, and reliance on agency staff had reduced. However, the provider was still recruiting, so families should ask how staffing levels and specialist cover are maintained.

    The provider had reduced their dependency on agency staff and continued to recruit.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Have the fire doors now been checked and certified, and can you show us the latest records?
  2. 02Which rehabilitation specialists will support my relative, and how often will therapy sessions take place?
  3. 03How do you make sure there are enough suitably skilled staff when agency staff are needed?
  4. 04How will you measure and review my relative's personal rehabilitation goals and progress?
  5. 05How will families be kept informed about the service improvement plan and any further changes?

This was a focused inspection covering Safe, Responsive and Well-led; the other key question ratings were not inspected during this visit and previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 November 2023 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Victoria House

2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.

  1. November 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Victoria House

  2. July 2022Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. February 2022Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. December 2020Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. October 2020

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 October 2020.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Nearby

Other care homes near Farnborough

Knellwood

Farnborough, GU14 · 0.3 km
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 8 years agocare home

Tall Oaks

Farnborough, GU14 · 0.5 km
Good
Residential
Rated 5 years agocare home

Blue Cedars

Farnborough, GU14 · 0.6 km
Good
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home

Willow House

Farnborough, GU14 · 0.6 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home