CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sea Bank House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that medicines were managed safely and that infection prevention measures were in place. They found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from the concerns examined.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were based on people's needs and staff worked with other organisations to support people's care.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection. People, relatives and staff who spoke with inspectors described the environment as caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager carried out regular checks and staff said they were supported and kept up to date with guidance.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Sea Bank House: targeted inspection found no evidence of harm, but the service was inspected and not rated.
This was a targeted inspection on 03 February 2021. It followed concerns about personal care, wound care and working with other agencies. The inspector found no evidence that people were at risk of harm.
Inspectors spoke with one person, two relatives, three staff and the registered manager. They checked two care records, medicines, infection control, the building and the home's management checks.
They found that medicines were given safely and on time. Infection control measures, including PPE, testing and social distancing, were in place. Care plans reflected people's needs, and people and staff described a kind and positive environment.
The home was inspected but not rated. Its previous overall rating was Good, published on 04 November 2019. This targeted inspection did not replace that rating because it did not cover the full service.
Safe medicines
Staff followed the correct procedures, received regular training and had their skills checked. Inspectors found that medicines were given on time and as prescribed.
“Staff followed correct procedures to ensure people received their medication on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, supported testing and followed rules on shielding and social distancing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Kind environment
People, relatives and staff described the home as positive and caring.
“Everyone we spoke with described a very positive, caring environment.” from the report
Management checks
The registered manager carried out regular checks on safety and welfare, including extra infection control monitoring during the pandemic.
“The registered manager completed regular checks of the service to ensure everyone's safety and welfare.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What actions were taken in response to the concerns about personal care and wound care?
- 02How do you make sure care plans remain up to date when people's needs change?
- 03How are medicines checks and staff competency checks carried out now?
- 04How do you work with doctors, nurses and other agencies when someone needs extra care?
- 05When is the next comprehensive CQC inspection expected?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns, including care delivery and infection control; it did not assess the full key questions, and the previous ratings carried over from 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 2021 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.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 8 October 2019. One inspector spoke with four people, five staff members and two relatives. They observed care, checked the home and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from avoidable harm, treated with dignity and supported by staff who understood their needs.
The home had previously been rated Requires Improvement, with two breaches of regulation. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and that the home was no longer breaching those regulations. A Good rating means the service was consistently managed and people's outcomes were consistently good at the time of the inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were kind and caring. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity and supporting their independence.
“People were cared for in a safe, clean and homely environment by staff who were caring, competent and knowledgeable about people's needs.” from the report
Safe systems
Risk assessments, care records, medicines checks and environmental checks had improved. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns.
“Risks to people's safety were assessed, documented and reviewed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care was based on people's needs, preferences and wishes. People and relatives were involved as much as they wanted.
“People's individual needs were assessed, and care records reflected the support they required and their wishes.” from the report
Improved leadership
The manager had introduced checks and acted on feedback. Inspectors found a caring culture and good teamwork.
“The registered manager had promoted an open, caring culture within the home and a strong ethos of teamwork to support people to live happily and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you keep risk assessments and care records up to date for each person?
- 02How do you check that medicines are given safely and that staff remain competent to administer them?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough staff to respond quickly when people need help?
- 04What is the current position on any applications for authorisation where a person may be deprived of their liberty?
- 05How are activities and relationships matched to each resident's interests and wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment; Safe and Well-led improved from Requires Improvement while the other three ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 November 2019 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 Sea Bank House
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedEffective: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 2011.
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.