We carried out a review of the data available to us about Springcare Support Services on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Springcare Support Services, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
Relatives were positive around the service received, particularly commenting on staff knowledge on supporting children with autism and supporting the family as a whole.
Professionals held the service in high regard due to the efficient management team and how staff supported people with complex care needs.
People received a consistent level of care from a team of regular care workers who built trusting relationships with families. There were enough staff employed to meet people's needs.
Risks to people were managed in a way that kept them as safe as possible whilst promoting independence and learning. Risk management guidelines were in place to help care workers when supporting people.
Procedures were in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.
Care plans were individualised and met the needs of people using the service. People were supported to lead socially active lives.
There was a clear management structure and staff told us they felt supported and valued. The management team had developed good working relationships with professionals which had positive outcomes for people.
Staff received regular training which was tailored to the needs of the person and their family.
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 support this practice.
There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.
Rating at last inspection: Good. Report published on 25 October 2016.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous inspection rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Springcare Support Services is a domiciliary care service for people that receive extra care in their own home. At the time of our inspection there were 21 people who received personal care from the agency. The service predominately provided personal care to young children with autism and learning disabilities. Three elderly people were receiving personal care at the time of the inspection.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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. The registered manager was not available on the day of the inspection. The nominated individual supported us with the inspection.
People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Relative told us they were happy with the support people received from the service. Staff knew how to report alleged abuse and were able to describe the different types of abuse. Staff knew how to ‘whistleblow’. Whistleblowing is when someone who works for an employer raises a concern about a potential risk of harm to people who use the service.
Most relatives told us they had no concerns with staffing levels and there had been no missed visits. Systems were in place to monitor staff punctuality and attendance.
Potential risks to people’s safety were assessed, recorded and plans were in place to minimise these risks.
People were supported by suitably qualified and experienced staff. Recruitment and selection procedures were in place and being followed. Checks had been undertaken to ensure staff were suitable for the role. Staff were suitably trained to carry out their duties and knew their responsibilities to keep people safe and meet people’s needs.
One to one supervisions with staff had been carried out regularly. Appraisals had not been carried out but had been scheduled for staff that had been working for over a year. Regular spot checks had been carried out to identify areas of best practise and improvement. Staff told us they were supported by management.
Questionnaires were completed by people, relatives and employees about the service, which we saw were positive. The findings of the survey was analysed to make improvements.
Staff told us permission was always sought when providing support. Relatives confirmed staff asked for consent. Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) training had been provided to staff.
There was a formal complaints procedure. People were aware of how to make complaints and staff knew how to respond to complaints in accordance with the service’s complaint policy.