Seaview

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

We saw evidence the registered manager investigated incidents and looked for where lessons could be learnt and improvements implemented. For example, bedrails had been fitted to 1 person’s bed to prevent them from falling. We saw another example ensuring appropriate footwear for a person at risk of falls.

The registered manager said, “We always discuss lessons learnt in our team meetings to ensure staff know what has happened and how to prevent incidents happening again.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

We saw evidence that ‘Hospital Passports’ were used by staff to aid the quick admission of people between the service and hospitals. The registered manager said, “We provide staff to be with people in hospital, our staff are needed to aid communication and to ensure people feel safe.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

One staff member said, “We keep people safe by following health and safety procedures and guidelines ensuring all safety procedures are considered in all activities. The safety of the people we support is at the centre of the service. If I had concerns, I would report them immediately and then escalate them the relevant local authorities.”

Another staff member said, “I follow and adhere strictly to all safety policies provided by my employer, reporting hazards or risks, respecting boundaries and working within my competencies. I would report concerns directly to my supervisor or the registered manager and I would follow the whistleblowing procedure if appropriate.”

Another staff member said, “We keep people safe by being vigilant to pick up any signs of abuse and take action by reporting concerns immediately, also by making sure people have control over their care and their wishes are respected.”

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

The registered manager adopted a positive approach to risk management, engaging directly with people to gain a thorough understanding of their circumstances, preferences and concerns. By involving people in discussions about potential risks, staff were able to identify not only the challenges but also the strengths and resources available to each person.

Staff members considered the full spectrum of risks such as physical, emotional, social, and environmental rather than focusing solely on clinical or immediate safety concerns. For example, 1 staff member told us how important it was to meet [person’s] dietary needs to reduce the feeling of hunger which can be a trigger. This comprehensive perspective ensured that risk assessments were balanced and proportionate, enabling individuals to take positive risks that could improve their quality of life, while minimising unnecessary restrictions.

Risk assessments were person-centred, and were tailored to the situation, needs and preferences of each person. This approach recognised that risks may vary significantly from person to person. By focusing assessments on people, the service could identify specific risks and develop strategies that addressed those risks in a way that respected the person’s autonomy and dignity. We saw evidence where 1 person had asked for a modification to be made to a piece of mobility equipment that would enable them to feel safer when accessing the community. The persons request had been respected and modifications were made. This was documented in the care plan and the risk assessment.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

There were environmental issues that could become detrimental to the health of a person. For example, the garden fence was damaged. The patio was damaged and loose in places, which puts people at risk of falls due to uneven flooring.There was damage to the kitchen floor that could be a trip hazard. The registered manager hadidentifiedthis risk and had put temporary measures in place to reduce risks to people.

The providerhad made some improvements tothekitchen by replacing cupboarddoors;however,the interior shelveswere discoloured and showingsigns of age. Therewere out of date herbs found withinthe kitchen stock foods.The provider did not have robust systems in place toidentifythis risk.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The provider implemented a training programme for all staff, covering key areas designed to enhance the quality of care offered to people and maintain robust health and safety standards. The provider required staff to refresh their training appropriately. This comprehensive approach ensured staff were well-equipped with the knowledge and skills necessary to deliver effective, safe, and compassionate care.

One staff member said, “I feel good and happy working at Seaview. I feel supported by training, have access to PPE and we have an enabling work environment.”

The provider had systems in place for safe recruitment of staff; however, we found some recruitment files with gaps in staff’s employment history. This was brought to the registered manager's attention for action.

Staff told us that they received a full induction programme upon starting at the service. The induction covered several vital areas, including initial training, familiarisation with the service’s policies and procedures, and opportunities for staff to get to know people they would be supporting. This process helped employees integrate smoothly into the service and ensured they were adequately prepared for their roles.In addition to their formal training, staff also received regular supervisions and ongoing support. These sessions provided opportunities for staff members to reflect on their practice, discuss any challenges they were facing, and receive guidance and feedback from their supervisors.

A staff member said, “I am happy working at Seaview and feel supported. A safe working environment and training has been provided.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They had systems in place that detected and controlled the risk of infection spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The registered manager conducted infection control audits to observe and assess staff performance, reinforcing that correct infection prevention and control measures were consistently followed during day-to-day routines.

Staff told us personal protective equipment (PPE) was available to them.

It was observed that the service was maintained in a clean and tidy condition.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

A relative told us, “In the past there has been medication errors.” The registered manager was open and transparent and acknowledged there had been errors with people’s medicines. They had identified and implemented a more robust approach to ensure people’s medicines were managed safely.

Audits took place to verify staff were putting into practice the knowledge gained during training sessions. For example, the audits included management of people’s medicine. This proactive approach played a key role in safeguarding individuals, while also supporting the ongoing improvement and development of staff skills.

Staff received appropriate training and had their competency evaluated before being allowed to administer medicines to people. This approach helped to ensure that medicines was given safely and effectively, in line with best practice and regulatory standards.