Seaview Haven

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 28 November 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment 23 July 2025 to 22 September 2025.

On site-visits 23 and 24 July 2025.

Seaview Haven is in the town of Ilfracombe in Devon. The service is registered to provide accommodation with personal care for up to 72 older people. The majority of older people presented with a dementia diagnosis. At the time of this assessment, there were 68 people living at this service.

This unannounced assessment was to follow up on concerns relating to food safety and hygiene, infection prevention and control, and the leadership and management of the service.

We carried out a comprehensive assessment of the service covering all 5 key questions – Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-Led. At our last assessment, we found breaches of legal regulations relating to consent, safe care and treatment, safeguarding, governance and staffing. At this assessment, we found 3 continued breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, governance and staffing. We found 2 new breaches of legal regulations relating to meeting nutritional and hydration needs and premises and equipment. Improvements had been made in relation to consent and safeguarding and the service was no longer in breach of these regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post. However, the manager had applied to register. At the time of the inspection the manager was on annual leave.

The provider had made improvements to the safety of the environment and there were ongoing refurbishment works. However, we observed poor hygiene standards across the kitchen environment.

The choice of meals, puddings and snacks on offer were not made readily available and did not meet individual’s needs and known food preferences.

We observed positive interactions between staff and people; however, we observed staff were not following appropriate guidance in relation to people’s dietary recommendations.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff, although their preferences and wishes were not always fully respected. Staff did not always respond to people in a timely way when people requested support.

There was mixed feedback regarding there being sufficient numbers of staff. A dependency tool was used to calculate the numbers of staff required, however some staff stated that there was a lack of staff sometimes meaning that peoples care was compromised. People and their relatives stated they thought staff numbers were too low on occasions which had affected the ability of staff to provide care in a timely manner.

We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.