Archived: Seacroft Court Nursing Home

39 people were living in the home. 21 required nursing care and 18 required personal care only. During the visit we spoke with four people who lived in the home, a qualified nurse and two members of care staff.

We found people were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had improved their arrangements to manage medicines.

There were not always enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs in a safe and timely way in order to be responsive to their needs. We said the provider needed to review their arrangements to ensure there were enough staff on duty at all times.

Whilst we were at the home we saw records were not always maintained appropriately and some of them could not be located promptly when we asked for them.

People told us they felt they were looked after well by staff. People said the food was good and they had plenty to eat and drink. One person told us, 'The food's fantastic.'

Care in the dementia unit did not always reflect best practice or recent research.

People living in the home felt safe. Staff had received training in abuse and understood what to do if they became aware of abusive behaviour.

Medicines were administered to people by staff who had received appropriate training. However we found they were not always managed safely in order to protect people from harm.

People told us there were enough staff to meet their needs. Staff told us they were required to make sure people's emotional and social needs were met as well as their physical ones. They said this was difficult to do when they were short staffed.

The home's 'statement of purpose' could be confusing for the general public. It did not mention the association between Collegia Care Limited and PrimeLife Limited.

We looked at a variety of records relevant to the management of the home. We found they were accurate and fit for purpose.

You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.