The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Seahaven Care Home in South Shields, which is run by Seahaven C.H Ltd, inadequate and placed it in special measures to keep people safe following an inspection in June.
Seahaven Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 30 people. It provides support to older people, including people who may live with dementia or a learning disability. At the time of this inspection there were 23 people using the service.
This unannounced inspection was prompted in part due to concerns CQC received about people's care, staffing, management and culture at the home. As well as following up on specific concerns which CQC had received about the service.
As well as the overall rating dropping from good to inadequate following this inspection, it has also declined from good to inadequate for being safe and well-led. The ratings for being effective, caring and responsive have dropped from good to requires improvement.
The service is now in special measures, which means it will be re-inspected to check sufficient improvements have been made and CQC will keep it under close review during this time to make sure people are safe.
Linda Hirst, CQC deputy director of operations in the North, said:
“We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people living with dementia, autistic people and people with a learning disability the safety, choices, dignity, and independence that most people are able to take for granted. When we inspected Seahaven Care, we had concerns that these needs weren’t being met at the standards people should be able to expect.
“There had been a change in management, since the last inspection, however, we found that significant shortfalls in previous leadership had created a culture that didn’t prioritise or assure the delivery of high-quality care due to poor policies and processes.
“People weren’t always safe. We saw they couldn’t alert staff if they were in distress as the call bells didn’t work in several bedrooms and medicines weren’t managed safely which put people at risk.
“Additionally, we found that the environment didn’t always allow people to live with dignity which infringed on their human rights. At the time of the inspection people didn’t have access to hot water in the bathrooms as the service had no way to guarantee they wouldn’t scald themselves. The result is that people weren’t always able to wash themselves. However, we were told by the management team that this would be addressed immediately.
“Clocks showed the incorrect time, and people had no way to check the date which can be disorientating especially for those whose ability in this respect is already compromised. We saw that menus were difficult to understand for those who found it hard to read, meaning people weren’t always able to choose what they wanted to eat and drink.
“We also saw an environment that was not personalised, comfortable and potentially compromised people’s dignity. People couldn’t personalise their bedrooms, including with items from home. Bedding and towels were worn or unavailable, curtains were hanging off the curtain rails, and carpets were stained and ill-fitting.
“We recognise that the service had new leaders who were starting to make improvements. It’s encouraging to see their plans for improvement including recent training for staff on how they can empower people to live their best lives.
“We have reported our findings to the provider, and they know what they must address. We’re monitoring them closely to ensure people are receiving safe care while they do this and we will return to inspect. If sufficient progress hasn’t been made, we will not hesitate to take further action to ensure people’s safety and wellbeing.”
Inspectors found:
- Care had not been person-centred and tailored to each individual, but improvements were being made so people were listened to and central to the focus of care delivery
- Some people and relatives said communication could be improved
- Leaders didn’t provide staff with policies and systems to support people to live their lives in the least restrictive way. They weren’t supported to have maximum choice and control of their own lives
- Medicines weren’t managed safely. They weren’t always stored correctly, and record weren’t always complete enough to keep people safe
- The building was not well-maintained, with ineffective infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe
- Communication needed to become more effective with relatives and people using the service to keep them informed and to respond to feedback and concerns.
However,
- Substantial improvements were being made to the running of the service to ensure people were the main focus of care delivery and they received safe, effective care that met their needs
- There had been a change in management and staff had received training to ensure the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensured people using services would be supported to lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives
- Staff were positive about the changes being introduced and working at the service. They said the new management team were approachable and they were supported in their role.