CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seaham View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Seaham View was rated Good; inspectors found safe, effective and well-led care, with some records and call-for-help arrangements needing improvement.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 24 August, 1 September and 5 September 2022. They spoke with people living in the home, contacted relatives, spoke with staff and managers, and checked care, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines arrangements, good infection control and support to access health services. Staff understood people's needs, protected them from abuse and supported their choices.
The previous rating was Requires Improvement because the quality assurance system was not effective. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and the home was no longer in breach of regulations. The overall rating changed to Good.
Enough skilled staff
There were enough staff during the day and night, including staff to provide one-to-one support for activities. Recruitment and induction processes were effective.
“There were enough staff to provide support throughout the night and day as well as one-to-one support to take part in activities.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff administered, recorded and stored medicines safely. They also followed principles intended to avoid excessive or inappropriate use of medicines.
“Staff followed systems and processes to administer, record and store medicines safely.” from the report
Support for health
People were supported to attend health checks, screening and primary care services. Staff referred people to health professionals when needed.
“People were supported to attend annual health checks, screening and primary care services.” from the report
Improved management
The home had improved its quality monitoring since the previous inspection. Managers reviewed incidents, monitored action plans and worked with other agencies.
“The registered manager maintained clear oversight of the service.” from the report
No nurse call system
needs fixingThe home did not use a nurse call system, so staff had to shout for help. Inspectors said this could present a risk in some parts of the home, although personal alarms were put in place during the inspection.
“The service does not use a nurse call system, which meant staff needed to shout to summon assistance.” from the report
- 01How can a person summon staff for help in every part of the building without a nurse call system?
- 02How are personal alarms checked and used to make sure people and staff can summon assistance quickly?
- 03How do you record whether each person agrees to one-to-one support or other restrictions?
- 04How do you monitor the quality of care now that the previous quality assurance breach has been addressed?
- 05What evidence can you provide about Caring and Responsive, which were not assessed in this inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 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, February 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but weaknesses in risk management, legal records and quality checks.
Inspectors visited on 17 December 2019, 2 January 2020 and 6 January 2020. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines records and management records.
People and relatives were positive about the care. Staff knew people well, treated them kindly and supported their choices, activities, relationships and independence. The ratings for Caring and Responsive were Good.
The inspectors found important gaps in safety and management. Risks were not always fully assessed or managed, fire drills were not completed as required, records about who was in the building were inaccurate, and records about mental capacity and best-interest decisions were missing.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection, published in 2017, to Requires Improvement. The report says the provider started fixing some issues during the inspection, but the quality assurance systems were not strong enough and one regulation was breached.
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw friendly and respectful interactions. Staff knew people's histories, preferences and support needs well.
“People appeared happy in the company of staff. Staff interacted with people in a friendly and respectful way.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in decisions and supported to express themselves. Staff promoted independence and respected people's privacy.
“People were promoted to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Activities and community life
Activities reflected people's interests, and people were supported to use local facilities, exercise and maintain important relationships.
“People were supported to access the local community, visit local shops and pubs.” from the report
Medicines and staffing
People received medicines as prescribed and staffing levels were judged sufficient for people's needs. Permanent staff recruitment was safe.
“People received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Risk and fire records
seriousSome risks were not fully assessed or managed. Fire drills did not follow the provider's policy, and records of who was in the building were inaccurate, creating a risk in an emergency.
“This posed a risk to people, staff and visitors in the event of a fire.” from the report
Missing legal records
seriousThe home could not show that mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions had taken place. Records about restrictions and legal representatives were also missing.
“There were no records to show 'Best interests' decisions meetings had taken place.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousAudits had found some issues but did not ensure they were dealt with promptly. This led to a breach of the good governance regulation.
“The service did not have effective systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Agency staff records
needs fixingThere were no records showing that agency staff had been checked or given an induction before supporting people.
“No evidence of an induction taking place to familiarise staff with building, safety measures and people was available.” from the report
Care plans
needs fixingSupport plans were lengthy and sometimes generic. They did not always explain clearly what staff should do or cover important areas of people's lives.
“Support plans were lengthy, provided generic information and at times did not specify exactly what staff were to do.” from the report
- 01Have all people's risk assessments been rewritten so they clearly explain the risks and the actions staff must take?
- 02Are mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions now recorded for every relevant decision?
- 03How often are fire drills completed now, and how do you keep accurate records of everyone in the building?
- 04How do you check agency staff before they start, and where are their induction records kept?
- 05What quality checks are now in place to make sure problems are fixed promptly?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, with the ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led falling from Good at the 2017 inspection while Caring and Responsive remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 2020 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 Seaham View
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2020Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 December 2010.
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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.