Seabourne House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. This is the first assessment for Seabourne House Care Home. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. Consent was sought and people were involved in their health and wellbeing. If there was a concern a person lacked capacity to make individual decisions, an assessment was carried out in accordance with the MCA. Staff knew people well and worked as a team to achieve positive outcomes for everyone. Health and social care professionals were involved in people’s care planning and delivery. The service worked to maximise effectiveness of people’s care and treatment by assessing and reviewing their care and wellbeing needs with them.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service ensured people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People told us they had been involved in assessments of their needs and creation of their care plans. A person said, “I have a care plan and was assessed when I came here. My [relatives] sort things out.” A relative told us, “[My family member] had assessments before they moved in. Nothing is too much for staff. There is always someone to help if we need it.” The manager told us the service completed robust preadmission and post admission assessments. Preadmission assessments were completed face to face to establish if the service could meet the person’s individual needs in all areas of their care requirements. Post admission assessments involved various departments within the service, for example care, maintenance, housekeeping and chef, to ensure all aspects of a person’s care were discussed and reviewed. People new to the service had 1 to 1 care on their first day to help them settle in and meet everyone. This also helped to establish if there were additional support needs and sufficient staff members on shift. A member of staff told us, “Information about new people is given to us before they move in. We go round and check people liked their meals after lunch. We go to meetings to discuss what meals people would like to see on the menu. Staff are very good always telling us if a person liked their meal or want something different. We talk with people when they have care plan reviews.”

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and formed part of their care plan. People and their relatives were complimentary about the food provision at the service. A person said, “They have a menu which gives a choice for the main meal. If I don’t like what they have on the menu they will make something else.” Comments from relatives included, “They sometimes offer me food when I am here. It is good that they offer a couple of hot meals a day. [Family member] is given a choice and if [family member] doesn’t want what is on the menu they will make [family member] a sandwich. [Family member] is eating much better than before. They also produce a picture version of the menu which is really good. People get lots of tea, cake and biscuits throughout the day”, “[My family member] has put a bit of weight on and likes the food”, and “We often eat here with [family member]. It’s good and [family member] likes it.” When required people were referred to the speech and language therapist (SALT). SALT provide assessment of swallowing or communication difficulties for people with medical, neurological and surgical conditions. People’s dietary requirements such as allergies, likes, dislikes and SALT plans, were included in their care plans. People received care, treatment and support that was evidence-based and in line with good practice standards. When required, people’s weight and fluid intake were monitored and recorded on the provider’s electronic system.

The service worked effectively across teams and services to support people. Relatives told us they were kept informed and felt involved in their family members’ care. A relative said, “Anything that needs an update I get told straight away.” Another relative told us, “I am very much involved in [my family member’s] care. I mentioned [my family member] needed a dental appointment, the service gave me a choice of 2. I was then updated after the appointment.” Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan and deliver people’s care, treatment and support. A staff member told us, “We speak with management if someone falls, and they assess and put it in the care plan. The care plan then gets updated and if anything happens when I'm off I check the handover, every day we get new information. The handover gives us the information we need.” Health and social care professionals told us they had effective working relationships with the service. A health and social care professional said, “The service is really good, friendly and staff are kind to people. We have great communication with Seabourne House Care Home.” Details and correspondence from health and social care professionals who were involved in people's care were recorded on the provider’s electronic system. This meant staff were able to easily access information on people’s health needs.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. The GP visited the service on a weekly basis. This meant the risks to people’s health and wellbeing were identified early. Staff told us they knew how to support people to live healthier lives and prevent deterioration. A staff member said, “Kitchen staff are really good (…) if someone is losing weight they do special food for them, they try to make different types of food.” The manager told us external health care professionals visited regularly, including the optician, dentist and chiropodist.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. The manager told us, “When doing our monthly reviews if we see an increase in a person's needs, we will complete a care plan review and look at whether the person may need more care and if staffing levels need to be adjusted. We will then look at how we need to go about this working with outside professionals for support in any areas needed.” Daily records showed people were getting care in accordance with their person-centred needs. Systems were in place to monitor care and support provided to people to ensure this remained effective. The electronic system used by the service alerted staff when agreed care tasks were not completed on time. This meant staff were prompted to complete all tasks for each person they cared for. Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s clinical needs in relation to their health conditions. The manager gathered feedback from relatives and people through meetings and surveys. One comment we saw on a survey said, “The home seems to be happy/ homely environment.”

Staff told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People’s views and wishes were taken into account when their care was planned. Consent was sought from people and where necessary in accordance with the MCA. A relative told us, “The staff are always very helpful. They always ask for [my family member’s] consent before they do anything and explain what and why they are doing things. I see them with other people, and they always explain things to them too.” People's capacity and ability to consent was considered, and they, or a person lawfully acting on their behalf, were involved in planning, managing and reviewing their care and treatment. A clear process was in place to carry out MCA assessments where required. Records showed staff completed their MCA training.