Seathorne Court Residential Home

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

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for 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.

Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and were confident about reporting any concerns. Their approach meant people were valued and their rights upheld. People told us they felt safe. A person said, “I feel safe here because of the staff. I have a keyworker who I can go to and they always listen to me.” Another person told us, “Staff treat me with respect.”

Professionals gave positive feedback about how the service managed safeguarding incidents. A professional told us, “Recently we had a person who had safeguarding concerns, the care home followed procedure effectively and in the best interest of the person.”

The provider did not always work well to manage risks. People were involved in finding out how they would like to manage risks. People’s wishes, where they had the mental capacity to decide about restrictions, were respected. Staff did provide care to meet people’s needs that was safe and supportive. However, risk assessments and care plans lacked information to ensure all staff had guidance about people's health conditions. This had not yet had a negative impact on people but meant there was a risk staff could miss signs and symptoms of a person’s health deteriorating. People with a mental health diagnosis did not have a crisis intervention care plan in place. These plans help staff to understand what to do in the event of an emergency situation.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in relation to the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. All fire and other equipment and utilities such as hoists and gas were checked and serviced regularly. There were further plans for development of the environment but a new extension and outdoor area had been built and meant people could utilise different spaces for different things. Consideration had been given to people living with dementia or who had a physical disability, in terms of signage and layout. People thought the home was well kept and the new garden area an asset. A person told us, “I feel very safe and happy here.” A relative said, “It is a bright friendly home. I have noticed they do lots of activities.”

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. The provider empowered staff to develop their care qualifications and promoted continuous learning. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. We observed there were always enough staff in each area of the home so people did not have to wait for any help they required. Staff approach was respectful and friendly and SOFI observations of interactions showed people responded positively with smiles and laughter when spoken to. A person told us, “Staff come quickly, if busy you have a little while to wait but if you press the red emergency button they come instantly.” A relative said, “The staff are second to none. They always treat my [family member] really well and go above and beyond to help. My [family member] said they feel safe and well cared for.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were accurate and consulted with their health care professional. People’s needs and preferences were met and staff involved people in planning about their medicines. However, we found errors in the level of stock of medicines and medicine stock was not being recorded and checked when being administered. This meant it was unclear if people had been receiving too much or too little medicine and what impact this had on their health. The provider acted quickly and introduced a new policy and more robust procedures for medicines. They also placed all staff responsible for medicines on additional training and implemented further quality audit checks.

Professionals were happy with the way medicines were managed in terms of staff responsiveness. A professional told us, “1 person is under review due to new medicines and we want a blood test every 2 weeks. Staff are good at doing what we ask for, I have confidence in that.”