CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seaford Head Retirement Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, admissions, PPE, testing, cleaning and the infection control policy. The provider also said it had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Seaford Head Retirement Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and staffing measures.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 17 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures were affecting the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, managing visitors and admissions safely, supporting testing, and keeping its infection control policy up to date. They were also told that measures were in place to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
The home had created a separate staff entrance leading to a changing and laundry area. Inspectors also noted good maintenance, replaced carpets and thorough cleaning and ventilation after visits.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give a rated overall judgement or a rated judgement for the Safe question.
Separate staff changing area
The home had created a dedicated entrance and changing area for staff. Staff changed into work uniforms and put on PPE there.
“A dedicated entry door for staff leading directly into a changing and laundry area had been created.” from the report
Cleaning and ventilation
A full-time domestic team worked at the home. Areas used by visitors were deep cleaned and ventilated after every visit.
“A full-time domestic team worked at the home and after every visit carried out a deep clean and thorough ventilation of areas where visitors had been.” from the report
Infection control arrangements
Inspectors were assured about the home’s arrangements for PPE, testing, safe admissions, visitors and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures, and have they affected the care provided?
- 02What PPE, testing and infection control arrangements are currently in place for staff and visitors?
- 03How do you currently manage visits, including cleaning and ventilation after visitors leave?
- 04How do you safely admit new residents and manage any infection risks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 2022 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management and no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 5 August 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, checked care records and medicines, and reviewed recruitment and quality checks. Further feedback was gathered after the visit.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. Staff knew people well and supported their choices, activities, health needs and communication.
People and relatives were positive about the care. The home had a complaints process, although there were no current complaints. The previous inspection, published in January 2017, also rated the service Good, so all ratings remained unchanged.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as kind and considerate. Inspectors saw calm, reassuring support that respected people's dignity and choices.
“Staff are kind and considerate and look after her extremely well.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered, stored, given and disposed of through safe systems. Staff had training and inspectors observed medicines being given safely.
“People had their medicines provided safely, in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs and preferences. Staff adapted communication and support to help people make choices and remain independent.
“There was a person-centred approach to planning and delivering care which was specific to each person's needs and preferences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to continue hobbies, join activities and keep in touch with relatives. Inspectors saw people enjoying both individual and group activities.
“A programme of activities were provided including painting, games, quizzes, music and films.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The care manager carried out regular checks and audits covering care, records, safety and service quality. Action plans were used when improvements were identified.
“The care manager completed a comprehensive system of quality checks and internal audits to monitor care, documentation, safety and quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and manage my relative's particular risks, such as falls, mobility, nutrition or moving and handling?
- 02How do you decide how many staff are needed for the people living here, and what happens if someone needs extra support?
- 03How will you involve me and my relative in care reviews, best-interest decisions and choices about daily life?
- 04How would you recognise and respond if my relative became anxious, unwell or unable to communicate clearly?
- 05How would you review whether the home could continue to meet my relative's needs if their health changed or they needed end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, accommodation, medicines, staffing, records and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 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 Seaford Head Retirement Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Seaford Head Retirement Home →
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Seaford Head Retirement Home →
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 August 2012.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.