Lindisfarne Seaham

Updated 24 October 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection. It took place on 19 and 21 September 2018 and was unannounced. This meant the provider did not know we were coming.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector, a specialist advisor with a specialism in nursing and an expert by experience with a specialism in dementia care. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service and the provider. This included previous inspection reports and statutory notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send to CQC within required timescales.

We contacted the local Healthwatch team and obtained information from the local authority commissioners for the service, the local authority safeguarding team, and the clinical commissioning group (CCG). Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

During our inspection we spoke with five people who lived at Lindisfarne Seaham. We spoke with the regional manager, registered manager, two nurses, eight care workers and the administrator. We also spoke with 10 relatives and two visiting professionals.

We looked around the home and made observations of people and staff interacting. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us. We viewed a range of records about people’s care and how the home was managed. These included the care records of five people in detail, medicine administration records for nine people, recruitment records of four staff, training and supervision records and records in relation to the management of the service.

Updated 24 October 2018

Lindisfarne Seaham is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home provides personal and nursing care for up to 62 people some of whom are living with dementia. The home is on three floors serviced by a lift and it separated into four separate areas. When we inspected there were 46 people living at the home.

This inspection took place on 19 and 21 September 2018 and the first day was unannounced.

At our last inspection on 21 and 24 March 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns.

This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. The home was meeting the requirements of the fundamental standards.

People, relatives and staff felt the service was still a safe place. People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.

We received mixed comments about staffing levels. Management were monitoring and increasing staffing levels to meet the needs of people in the home.

People received their medicine safely and were supported to access the support of health care professionals when needed.

Where risks were identified to people who used the service or to the environment these were assessed and plans put in place to reduce them. Accidents and incidents were analysed to identify trends and reduce risks.

People’s needs had been assessed both before and after their admission to identify their care needs.

Staff were well supported and received the training they needed. Training levels were closely monitored and there were high levels of completion. Training was also being developed to give staff more opportunities to reflect on their practice.

People received a varied and nutritional diet that met their preferences and dietary needs. The service provided a range of nutritional food and drink which were adapted for different diets.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they thought the service was very caring and we observed compassionate and caring interactions between people and staff. People told us, and we observed, that care was delivered with dignity and respect and people were supported to be as independent as possible.

Care plans were very detailed and reflected people’s needs and preferences. Care plans were evaluated regularly and included meaningful information about people’s needs.

People were actively engaged in a range of activities and had regular opportunities to access the wider community.

Feedback on the service was encouraged in a range of ways and was positive. People told us they did not have any concerns about the service but knew how to raise a complaint if needed.

The management team were approachable and they and the staff team worked in collaboration with external agencies to provide good outcomes for people. Processes were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided and drive improvement. We saw on-going improvement plans being put into action.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.