CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Lighthouse Selsey
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe, and relatives were confident their loved ones were safe. Staff understood safeguarding, risks, medicines and infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed, and staff supported food, health care, activities and decision-making. Staff received training, supervision and support.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. The report says the previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this visit. The report says the previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was visible and approachable, and staff understood the home's values. Audits, feedback and partnership working were used to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but the inspection was focused on three areas.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 27 and 28 April 2023. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. Records about care, medicines, recruitment, training, safety and management were also checked.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff understood their needs, medicines were managed safely, and people were supported with health, food, activities and making their own choices.
The overall rating remained Good. Caring and Responsive were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Calm and supportive home
Inspectors found the home helped people enjoy daily life and reduced anxiety or emotional upset.
“The service provides a calm home which supports people to enjoy their life with reduced anxiety or emotional upset.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to take part in household tasks, activities, work and health decisions. Staff aimed to use the least restrictive approach.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Positive relationships
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw compassionate and empowering care from a stable team.
“We observed people receiving compassionate and empowering care which was tailored to their needs throughout the inspection.” from the report
Communication tools still developing
minorInspectors saw good verbal communication, but few additional communication tools were in evidence. The manager was developing pictorial prompts and staff learning in Makaton.
“We observed good verbal communication between people and staff, however there was limited augmented communication tools in evidence.” from the report
Some repairs remained
minorThe home had identified repairs and replacement work, including kitchen cabinets, flooring and painting. An action plan was in place for the remaining work.
“The provider had identified a number of repair or replace tasks, including kitchen cabinets, dining room and hall flooring, as well as general painting.” from the report
- 01What communication tools are now available, including pictorial prompts and Makaton support?
- 02What repair and replacement work remains, and when is it due to be completed?
- 03How will you support my relative to take part in household tasks, activities and the local community?
- 04How do you review whether medicines can be reduced or managed more independently?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing their care and giving feedback?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 May 2023 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, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the home larger than current best practice guidance.
This was a planned inspection on 30 December 2019. One inspector reviewed care, medicines and management records, spoke with three people, five staff and seven professionals, and observed how people and staff interacted.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, personalised care plans, good support with health needs, and kind relationships between people and staff.
The home supports up to nine people with learning disabilities and/or autism. Eight people lived there at the inspection. It is also registered to provide care in people's own homes, but nobody was receiving that service at the time.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday decisions, take positive risks and learn practical skills. Staff helped people build confidence in activities such as shopping, cooking and using the community.
“People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, routines and communication needs. Staff used this information to provide care that reflected each person.
“People's care plans were person-centred and captured their likes, dislikes and preferences.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw warm relationships between people and staff. Staff knew people well and treated them with compassion, dignity and respect.
“We observed people and staff had developed positive relationships, and staff treated people with compassion, kindness and respect.” from the report
Community involvement
People took part in activities, clubs, day services and volunteer roles. The home was arranged to help people be part of the local community.
“This supported people's integration into the local community” from the report
Strong oversight
The manager used audits, feedback and action plans to monitor the service and make improvements. Staff described the leadership and teamwork positively.
“The service had quality assurance systems in place, which were used to good effect and to continuously improve on the quality of the care provided.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home is larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said its size did not have a negative impact on people at the time of inspection.
“The home is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative to build independence and take positive risks safely?
- 02How would you adapt communication and information for my relative's particular needs?
- 03How do you support people with their medicines, including any wish to manage them independently?
- 04How would my relative be supported to take part in activities, work experience or community life?
- 05How does the home's size affect daily life, privacy and the choice of people my relative lives with?
This planned inspection covered the residential care home and all five CQC questions; the service was also registered for care in people's own homes, but no one was using that service at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 January 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 The Lighthouse Selsey
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 April 2011.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West 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 £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 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.