Sheerwater House

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 25 June 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of assessment: 27 March 2025 to 8 April 2025.

Sheerwater House is a care home without nursing for up to 20 older people, including people living with dementia. There were 18 people living at the home at the time of our assessment.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises, and the care provided, and both were looked at during this assessment.

We visited the home unannounced on 27 March 2025. The visit was carried out by 2 inspectors and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

We carried out this assessment as we had received information of concern about staffing levels and the care provided to some people at night. We did not find evidence to support these concerns. However, we did find the provider was in breach of regulations in relation to medicines management and governance.

Medicines management systems were not effective in ensuring correct administration and accurate recording. This meant the provider could not be assured people were receiving their medicines as prescribed.

The provider’s quality monitoring and governance systems were not effective in identifying risk or areas where improvements were needed. Records were not always accurate or up to date, which meant the provider had limited assurances about safety and quality.

There were enough appropriately qualified and experienced staff on duty to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. The home had a consistent staff team, which meant people received good continuity of care. There was a good sense of teamwork, and managers and staff worked effectively together to ensure people’s needs were met.

Staff understood any risks in people’s care and managed these well. Staff understood their responsibility to recognise and report abuse and knew how to do this.

Staff understood the importance of promoting choice and consent. If people lacked capacity to make decisions about their care, procedures were in place to ensure decisions were made in their best interests.

People were supported to access input from healthcare professionals when they needed it. Managers and staff worked well with other professionals to achieve good outcomes for people.

Staff treated people with respect and maintained their dignity when providing care. People were able to choose how they spent their time, and their preferences were known and respected by staff. People’s friends and families were made welcome when they visited and encouraged to become involved in the life of the home.

The environment was homely, but we found some parts of the home needed refurbishment. People were happy with the cleanliness of their rooms, although we found some parts of the home would benefit from additional cleaning.

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