Seaview

Updated 25 January 2024

Seaview is a residential care home providing personal care to people who may be living with learning disabilities. We completed this assessment between 29 January 2024 and 16 February 2024, we visited the service on 29 January 2024, and we spoke to relatives remotely about their experiences of the service. We assessed 9 quality statements including Learning culture, Safeguarding, Involving people to manage risk, Safe and effective staffing, Assessing needs, Consent to care and treatment, Independence, choice and control, Equity in experiences and outcomes and Governance. We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence, and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it. We identified shortfalls within the service and breaches of regulation were identified in relation to risk management, reporting and identifying safeguarding concerns, governance of the service and person centred care. Although we found areas of concern at this assessment until we have assessed more quality statements in the key questions safe and well led the rating for this service remains the same.

Updated 25 January 2024

People told us they did not always feel safe living at the service. People had reported experiences which had made them feel unsafe, staff had not always believed them and had not investigated to reduce the risk of it happening again. Staff had not recognised when people were at risk and had not reported incidents to the provider or the local authority to keep people safe. People had not been supported to identify goals and aspirations. Staff did not support them to be as independent as possible and develop new skills. People did not always have access to activities and opportunities to go out in the community were limited. People told us they were often bored and spent a lot of time within the service. People were not consistently supported to take positive risks and choices.