CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seymour Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, cleaning, visits, safe admissions and outbreak management. The provider also described measures to reduce the risks from 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control during a targeted COVID-19 review.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors gave 24 hours' notice and looked at infection prevention and control, as well as any staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home had systems to help prevent infection. Inspectors found clean premises, trained staff, suitable protective equipment and arrangements for visits. They were assured about testing, social distancing, safe admissions and managing outbreaks.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give a rating for the overall service or for the other four questions.
Infection control
Inspectors found systems to prevent infections and were assured that the premises and facilities were clean.
“There were infection prevention and control systems in place. Staff made sure that the premises and facilities were clean.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Inspectors were assured that protective equipment was being used safely and that testing was available for residents and staff.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visits and vaccination
The home was facilitating visits in line with current guidance and was meeting the COVID-19 vaccination requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals.
“The service was meeting the requirement to ensure non-exempt staff and visiting professionals were vaccinated against COVID-19.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19?
- 02How do you check that PPE is used effectively and safely?
- 03How are residents and staff tested, and what happens if there is a positive result?
- 04How are visits being facilitated now, and what infection control measures are in place?
- 05What changes have you made after being signposted to resources to develop your approach?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19 related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 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 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with follow-up needed on as-required medicines and outdated policies.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 30 January and 5 February 2018. Inspectors spoke with all five people living at the home, staff, managers and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staffing and recruitment files, complaints, surveys, policies, accident records and safety checks.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found people felt safe and trusted staff. Staff were kind, respected people's privacy and choices, and supported people to be independent. Care was personalised, activities reflected people's wishes, and people were helped with food, healthcare and communication.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found medicines were generally managed safely, but recommended written protocols for all as-required medicines. They also found that most policies had passed their review dates.
Since the previous inspection in December 2015, the home had improved its premises, including redecorating and replacing flooring. The previous rating for Effective, Requires Improvement, had improved to Good.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff provide emotional support and treat people with dignity. People said staff were kind and caring.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's physical, emotional, religious and cultural needs. People helped shape their care plans and could choose activities.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to do tasks for themselves, using suitable equipment where needed. Inspectors saw people helping with food, personal care and household tasks.
“People were supported to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Improved premises
The home had acted on the previous recommendation about the building. Rooms had been redecorated, flooring replaced and the environment adapted to people's needs.
“During this inspection we found the refurbishment had taken place.” from the report
Good staff training and support
Staff received induction, ongoing training, regular supervision and annual appraisals. They understood people's needs and how to support consent and safety.
“Staff had attended relevant training and were supported by means of regular supervision and annual appraisal.” from the report
As-required medicines
needs fixingOnly one person had a written protocol for as-required medicine. The manager agreed to put protocols in place for everyone receiving these medicines.
“We recommend that best practice guidance is followed and PRN protocols are put in place for all as required medicines.” from the report
Policies were out of date
needs fixingMost policies had passed their review dates, so staff did not have access to the most up-to-date guidance. An update was planned over the following six months.
“We reviewed policies relating to the running of the service and found that most of them had gone past the review date.” from the report
- 01Have written protocols now been put in place for every person's as-required medicine?
- 02Have all the home's policies been reviewed and updated since the inspection?
- 03How many staff are on duty during the day and overnight, and how is this matched to each person's needs?
- 04How will you support my relative to make choices, remain independent and take part in activities they enjoy?
- 05How will my relative's dietary, cultural and religious needs be recorded and reviewed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with visits on 30 January and 5 February 2018; all five ratings were given at this inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 2018 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 Seymour Gardens
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Redbridge
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 £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.