Springfield

Updated 11 February 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was completed by one inspector.

Service and service type

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

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

The inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

We reviewed information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We used all this information to plan our inspection. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We met both people who lived at the service. We spoke with three members of staff, the registered manager and the operations manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included two people’s care records and medicine records. We looked at one staff file in relation to recruitment and at the staff supervision records. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to receive further information from the service. We sought further clarification from the registered manager regarding the support provided to people who lived in the service. We also received information from two healthcare professional and three relatives.

Updated 11 February 2020

About the service

Springfield is a care home providing care for up to three people. On the day of our visit two people lived at the service. Each had their own self-contained flats. The service provides support to people who have a learning disability and some who may challenge the service.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

We met and spoke to both people during our visit. However, people who lived at Springfield had some communication difficulties due to their learning disability and associated conditions, such as autism. Therefore, they were not able to tell us verbally about all their experience of living there and we spent very short periods of time with people. Staff informed us how people spent their day.

People’s relatives said they felt their loved ones were safe with the staff supporting them. However, there were some issues raised about the wellbeing of one person and the lack of activities they were involved with. After the inspection we received information that measures had been put in place to resolve these issues. Systems were in place to safeguard people. Risks to them were identified and managed.

People received their medicines safely in the way prescribed for them. Infection control measures were in place to prevent cross infection. Staff were suitably recruited. Staffing levels were flexible to enable the service to provide a bespoke service to people to meet their needs.

People were supported by staff who completed an induction, training and were supervised. The support required by people with health and nutritional needs was identified and provided.

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

Relatives felt the staff were kind and caring. People’s privacy and independence were promoted.

Systems were in place to deal with concerns and complaints. People where supported by staff to complete monthly satisfaction questionnaire. The questionnaire was available in a easy read format and held information for people to raise a complaint.

People’s computerised care records were detailed and personalised to meet individual needs. Staff understood people’s needs and responded when needed. People were not able to be fully involved with their support plans, therefore family members or advocates supported staff to complete and review people’s support plans. People’s preferences were sought and respected.

People had staff support to access activities and holidays. This was flexible and provided in response to people’s choices.

People’s communication needs were known by staff. Staff had received training in how to support people with different communication needs.

Staff and a relative were positive about the management of the service. Staff told us senior management and the registered manager were very approachable and always available for advice and support. However, we received feedback from professionals and relatives on the frequent changes of managers and staff team which they felt did not help with continuity.

Records were accessible and up to date. The service was audited, and action taken to address any areas identified that needed improving. Staff were committed to providing good outcomes for people.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (Published 5 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.