Archived: Seaswift House Private Residential Home for the Elderly Seahill Seaton Devon

' Outcome 4 ' Care and welfare of people who use services

' Outcome 7 ' Safeguarding people who use services from abuse

' Outcome 14 ' Supporting staff

' Outcome 16 ' Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision

In addition, we looked at one other outcome standard related to the safety and suitability of the premises.

At the time of our visit, the home did not have a registered manager. The previous manager had left over a year ago. There was an acting manager in post since the previous manager left. We asked about the reason for the delay in registering the new manager. We were told the acting manager had wanted to gain more experience in their first management post before making a commitment to register. We were assured us that an application to register would be submitted in the near future.

When we visited there were eleven people living at the home. We met with nine people and two visitors and asked them about them about their experiences. We looked at three people's care records in detail to see how their needs were assessed and to check their care plans addressed those needs. We spoke with five staff and the provider and asked them how they meet people's care needs. We observed staff interactions with people in communal areas of the home. We looked at training, appraisal and supervision records for four members of staff to assess how well they were supported to undertake their work.

One person said 'I'm very happy here, I wouldn't go anywhere else'. A second person said, 'all staff are very sweet and the food is excellent'. A third person said they thought the care workers were 'on top of their job'. We found significant improvements had been made in the care records, which were comprehensive, regularly updated and accurately reflected people's care needs.

Since our last inspection, staff had undertaken additional safeguarding training and the policy had been updated. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about abuse, knew how to raise concerns, including how to report any concerns to the local authority. A range of new systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of services that people received had been introduced. These included a range of daily, weekly and monthly checks with actions taken to address any concerns identified.

We found problems with two of the three fire exits at the home. We found the stairwell to one fire exit was partially obstructed with various items and that another fire door would not open. This meant people were at risk because they would be hampered from safely evacuating the home in the event of a fire. These concerns were addressed on the day of the inspection but were known about the previous week. Improvements were needed to ensure that urgent maintenance requests were appropriately prioritised so that people were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

The provider was compliant with four of the five standards we inspected.