Seaview

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 3 September 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 9 July to 8 August 2026

Seaview is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to 20 people with a variety of care and support needs.

We visited the home on 9 and 24 July. At the time of the assessment, 17 people were living at the home.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgments about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.

The provider took steps to learn and improve from reported incidents and untoward events. There were some environmental safety issues which the provider was working to address. We were not assured staffing arrangements were always coordinated to meet people’s needs in a safe and timely manner. However, there was no evidence that people had experienced harm or neglect. Medicines were managed safely and in accordance with people’s needs.

Staff assessed people’s needs and delivered care following best practice guidance. Staff monitored outcomes for people and ensured they were involved in care and treatment decisions. There was limited meaningful activity which restricted social interaction and opportunities for people. However, the provider was reviewing their activity programme with the resident ambassador to drive improvements in this area.

Staff were kind, caring and thoughtful and people were treat with respect and dignity. People’s wishes, choices and rights were respected. Staff made every effort to support people’s care and treatment preferences. There were occasions where people did not always feel staff responded to their needs in a timely manner. The provider recognised the importance of staff wellbeing and good morale.

Staff worked well with healthcare partners to ensure people received person-centred care, continuity and access to services. People were informed, involved and kept up to date about their care and treatment needs. Staff were very compassionate and sensitive in their support of people and their families at the end of their lives. The provider had recommenced engagement meetings so people could share their views and contribute to the service.

Managers and staff worked together to deliver good outcomes for people. There was a caring, supportive and inclusive culture within the home. Staff could speak up about matters of importance and contribute to improvements in the home. The provider had taken proactive steps to address feedback around governance and documentation standards. People had benefitted from improvement initiatives.