Archived: Seahorses

Updated 10 February 2025

Date of inspection: 14 February to 10 March 2025. The service is a care home providing support for older people and people living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, the service had no registered manager, but the service was being overseen by the home manager who had applied to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to become the registered manager, and was being supported by the nominated individual. We assessed the service to follow up on enforcement notices served following a previous assessment, and we previously identified concerns in risk management, recruitment, staff training, capacity and consent, choice and control, and overall governance. We assessed 18 quality statements in the safe, effective, caring, and well-led domains. At this inspection, we found risks were still not always identified or managed safely, which placed people at risk of harm. Staff were still not recruited safely in line with the providers policy and legislation. People’s medicines were not managed safely. Systems and processes to ensure people received safe care were still not always effective. Staff had completed a wide variety of training relevant to their role, which was an improvement since the last inspection. However, staff had not completed training in supporting people with modified diets, despite some people receiving these to prevent choking or aspiration. However, there was a positive culture at the service which promoted dignity and respect. Staff were kind and caring and knew people well. People’s environment was managed safely, including any checks on equipment which people used. Staff spoke positively about the service and felt supported by the manager and the nominated individual. We identified 3 breaches of the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, good governance, and staffing. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.

Updated 10 February 2025

While the people we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards.People described staff as kind, caring, wonderful and attentive. One person told us, “[Nominated individual] is a very nice kind man. Everything he does is kind and everybody likes him. When I first came here, he sat with me and told me everything about the home.” Relatives described how staff were attentive, friendly and respectful. One relative told us, “Communication is first class.” Another relative told us, “[Seahorses] was like a family and made me feel I was welcome anytime. I would not hesitate in recommending them.” People and their relatives felt the service was safe. However, the provider did not always involve people about decisions around their care. For example, we found the service wrote the menu for the week without people’s involvement. We were informed that if people did not like what they were given, they were able to have something else. However, we found one person who told us, “I have never liked the food here”.