CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Seymour House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm, and risks to their health and welfare had been assessed. Medicines, staffing, safeguarding and infection control were found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training and supervision relevant to people's needs. People received support with healthcare, food, exercise and legal decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people to make decisions, maintain relationships and develop independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans recorded people's preferences and were reviewed when needs changed. People were supported with activities, hobbies, communication and concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture and systems to monitor quality. Audits, meetings and surveys were used to identify concerns and make improvements.
What inspectors found, January 2019
Seymour House is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 January 2019. One inspector spoke with five people living at the home, observed staff, spoke with staff and managers, and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records.
The inspectors found that people were safe and received effective, caring and personalised support. Staff knew people well, supported their choices and helped them take part in activities, maintain relationships and build independence.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 8 July 2016.
Risk management
Risks to people's health and welfare had been assessed, with clear guidance for staff. Inspectors saw staff following guidance effectively, including when supporting people with seizures or distress.
“Potential risks to people's health and welfare had been assessed and there was detailed guidance for staff to follow to mitigate the risk.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people's choices and preferences and treated them with compassion. People were supported to express their views and make decisions about their care.
“We observed people being treated with kindness and respect.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to attend day centres, go swimming and shopping, enjoy hobbies and develop everyday skills such as making drinks and doing housework.
“People had the opportunity to take part in activities they enjoyed.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Regular audits, meetings and surveys were used to monitor the service. When shortfalls were identified, action plans were put in place and checked.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess whether you can meet my relative's needs before they move in?
- 02How would staff support my relative if they became distressed or showed behaviour that may challenge?
- 03What activities, community links and support to build independence would be available for my relative?
- 04How would staff support my relative's communication, cultural, religious and sexuality preferences?
- 05How are concerns raised by residents or families recorded and followed up?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, and the inspectors looked at both the care and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 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 Seymour House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.