CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seaview House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found that risks, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support suited to their needs, including healthcare, nutrition and specialist training. Their rights and choices were supported under the law, and restraint, isolation and seclusion were not used.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people well and supported their independence, communication and personal choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and flexible. People were supported to follow hobbies, visit places in the community, maintain relationships and communicate in ways they could understand.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had regular quality checks and a person-centred approach. Inspectors raised concerns about staff support during restructuring and the lack of a replacement manager at that time.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Seaview House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some management changes being monitored.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 and 16 October 2019. One inspector spent time with all four people living there, met one relative, observed daily life and checked the building. They spoke with four staff and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff knew them well and people were supported to make choices, stay active and use community services.
Staffing levels were judged sufficient and medicines, safeguarding and risks were managed safely. The home was clean, care was personalised and staff supported people with health needs, communication and independence.
The registered manager was leaving and the provider was recruiting a replacement. Inspectors also had concerns about staff support during restructuring, but the provider shared plans for continued oversight. The previous overall rating was also Good.
Strong relationships
Many staff had worked at the home for around 20 years. Inspectors saw warm, trusting relationships between staff and people living there.
“People and staff knew each other very well and told us Seaview House was "just like a family home.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make day-to-day choices, take positive risks and take part in hobbies and community activities.
“People were leading fulfilling and active lives and were supported to engage as full citizens within the local and wider community.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Staffing was monitored and extra staff could be arranged when needed. Medicines were managed safely, with staff training and competency checks.
“People were well supported as staffing levels were carefully monitored to ensure people received prompt care and support to achieve their goals.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, needs and communication requirements. Staff adapted the home and support to promote comfort and independence.
“People's care plans were personalised and were written with people's input as much as possible.” from the report
Management changes
needs fixingThe registered manager was leaving and a replacement had not yet been appointed. Inspectors also had concerns about staff support while a senior role was being phased out.
“We had some concerns about staff support during a period of restructuring, the phasing out of the senior role, and not yet having a replacement manager.” from the report
- 01Who is managing the home now, and what arrangements are in place if the replacement manager has not yet started?
- 02How has staff support been maintained since the senior role was phased out?
- 03How will you preserve the stable, familiar staff relationships described in the report?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 05How would you support my relative's particular health, communication, activity and community needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the premises and care inspected; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staff still completing improved supervision training.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 May 2017. Inspectors met all four people living in the home, spoke with staff and health and social care professionals, and checked care files, medicines, staffing, recruitment, food, fire safety and infection control.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, medicines management, risk assessments, care plans and quality checks. People were supported with health care, activities, communication and daily choices.
The home had remained Good since the previous inspection in April 2015. Inspectors said it met all relevant fundamental standards. They noted that some staff still needed to complete training in a new supervision approach.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found staffing levels met people’s needs and medicines were appropriately managed. Risk assessments and safeguarding arrangements were also in place.
“Staffing levels met the needs of people in the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff supported people sensitively and encouraged independence. Inspectors saw warm relationships that remained professional.
“The relationships were warm and caring, yet remained professional.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people’s needs, wishes, routines and goals. They were regularly reviewed and updated.
“Each person had a detailed and current care plan that outlined how the assessed needs and wishes would be met.” from the report
Good oversight
The home had internal and external audits, detailed records and plans for improvement. Staff were encouraged to discuss and reflect on their practice.
“The home had an established quality monitoring system in place.” from the report
Supervision training not complete
minorTraining on a new supervision approach had started, but some team members had not finished it at the time of inspection.
“We saw that this had started but that some team members still needed to finish the training.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed the training on the improved supervision approach?
- 02How are people involved in choosing and reviewing their activities and daily routines?
- 03What new activities and community involvement have been introduced since the inspection?
- 04How are medicines, including sedative medicines, reviewed and reduced where possible?
- 05How would you support my relative if they found it difficult to communicate their needs?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall quality of the service and all five CQC questions; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in April 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 June 2017 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 Seaview House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
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.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.