About the service:

Seymour House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided and both were looked at during this inspection. Seymour House provides a service for up to 40 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 39 people living at the service. Accommodation is provided over three floors and people have access to communal areas.

People’s experience of using this service:

• Staff understood the risks to people and the measures in place to keep them safe. Systems were in place to manage people's medicines safely and to reduce the risks associated with the spread of infection.

• Sufficient numbers of staff were employed to meet people's needs. Staff received training that gave them the necessary skills and knowledge to carry out their roles and meet the specific needs of people using the service.

• People were supported to maintain good health. Staff made referrals to health professionals when required.

• People were provided with the care, support and equipment they needed to stay independent. Staff were kind and caring and had developed good relationships with people using the service.

• People were supported to maintain their health and had access food and drink based on their individual choice and preferences. People had access to a wide range of activities in the community and within the service, that reflected their specific needs and interests.

• Care plans were in place which guided staff to provide support that met people's needs which were in line with their preferences.

• People's privacy, dignity and rights were respected and upheld. People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible

• Systems were in place to monitor the service, which ensured that people's risks were mitigated and lessons were learnt when things went wrong. There was an open culture within the service, where people and staff could approach the registered manager who acted on concerns raised to make improvements to people's care.

Rating at last inspection:

Good (report published 9 September 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remains Good.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor all intelligence received about the service to ensure the next inspection is scheduled accordingly.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

We carried out an unannounced inspection on 15 and 16 June 2016.

The service provides care and support to older people with a range of support needs, including chronic health conditions, physical disabilities, and those living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 39 people were being supported by the service.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised. There were systems in place to safeguard people from avoidable harm. The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient staff to support people safely. People’s medicines were managed safely.

Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs. They understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care being provided. Where people did not have capacity to consent to their care or make decisions about some aspects of their care, this was managed in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful staff. They were supported to make choices about how they lived their lives. People had adequate food and drinks to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were also supported to access other health services when required.

People’s needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. They were involved in reviewing their care plans. People had been provided with enjoyable activities and some had been supported to pursue their hobbies and interests outside of the home.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people who used the service, their relatives other professionals and staff, and they acted on the comments received to improve the quality of the service.

The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive continuous improvements. Staff said that the manager provided stable leadership and effective support, and they also promoted a caring and culture within the service.

The people we spoke with said that the care and treatment they received was good. One person said “The staff are very nice. The food is good and my room is nice too. I have no concerns.” Another person said “Everything is alright for me. The staff looked after me. They are caring.” A relative said “My grandmother is well cared for. We have no complaints.”

We found that the provider was meeting the standards we had inspected. People and their relatives had given their consent to received care and treatment that were safe and appropriate. There were suitable arrangements in place for the management and safe administration of medicines and all the required checks had been carried out before staff had been employed to work at Seymour House.There was a system for assessing and monitoring of the quality of service.

The provider and staff demonstrated they were aware of people’s cultural needs and for ensuring equality and valuing diversity.

This was a responsive review following some information of concern being given to the Care Quality Commission. The visit was completed out of hours and commenced at 23:00 hrs

On arrival we found most of the people who lived at Seymour house were in bed. We observed those people to be asleep in rooms that were appropriately lit and of a reasonable temperature. In some cases we noted that there was a light on to assist people with orientation if they were to wake. We noted that people were appropriately dressed for bed and had clean linen on their beds.

Several people were still awake and sitting in their rooms with a hot drink and a snack.

We looked at pressure care records for two people and noted they were required to be checked on a two hourly basis and these records had been completed appropriately. We observed that there were four members of staff on duty including a senior shift leader.

The home was warm, welcoming and well lit up for the time of night. Two people who lived at Seymour House told us they were well looked after and the staff were lovely.

We observed that in all the corridors, doors were labelled and had a picture to assist people with identifying where they were going. We noted staff were replenishing the snack trolleys in the lounges. The staff told us these were available at all times for people to help themselves when required.

People told us that they felt very happy to be living at Seymour house. One person said that all the stress and worry of maintaining a home had been taken away and that life was more enjoyable now. The home was very warm and welcoming and people were busy getting on with all the different things that were going on. Another person said that they enjoyed the company and never felt lonely anymore.

People told us that the quality of care was very good, and that there was always plenty of staff around to assist them. There was a variety of activities provided each day and activities were planned around people’s individual abilities. This meant that everyone who wanted to be involved could be.

In each of the lounges there was a trolley laid with drinks and snacks and people were able to help themselves when required. A visiting relative said that they were happy that they had chosen this home, and that everything had met with their expectations and exceeded them.

This review was conducted late at night therefore it was not possible to talk to the people who live in the home.

During our visit on 01 September 2011, people told us that they were happy with the care they received and they said that staff were kind and looked after them well. One person who stays in their room, told us that although they like to stay in their own room they were lonely as nobody came to see them.

All the people we spoke with told us that the food was good and that it was tasty.