Spring Park

Updated 11 November 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on 27 September 2017 and was unannounced. Due to the small size of the service, one inspector carried out the inspection.

Before the inspection we reviewed the evidence we had about the service. This included any notifications of significant events, such as serious injuries or safeguarding referrals. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. The registered manager had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we met all of the people who lived at Spring Park. We spoke with two people. Some people were not able to tell us directly about their experience due to their communication needs. We observed the support they received and the interactions they had with staff. We spoke with four staff which included the registered manager and one relative.

We looked at the care records of two people. We looked at how medicines were managed and records relating to this. We checked three staff recruitment records, minutes of staff meetings and records of staff training and supervision. We looked at records used to monitor the quality of the service, such as health and safety checks and the provider’s audits of different aspects of the service.

After the inspection we spoke with one relative and one social care professional by telephone to hear their views about the care their family members received. We also received feedback by email from another social care professional who had some involvement with people in the home.

Updated 11 November 2017

Spring Park provides accommodation, personal care and support for up to three adults who have a learning disability. There were four people living at the home at the time of our inspection as the provider had recently changed their statement of purpose to accommodate an additional person in the house.

There was a registered manager in place, who had taken up their post since our last inspection. 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 assisted us with our inspection.

People were supported to eat safely. People who had needs related to eating and drinking had guidance in place to help ensure they received their food in the most appropriate way for them. People were supported to eat the food they wanted. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and knew people well. We observed people being supported in line with their care plans which were person-centred and detailed.

Where necessary, referrals had been made to health and social care professionals to ensure that people remained healthy. People’s well-being was the most important thing to staff and as such staff put people at the heart of the service. People were encouraged to experience a wide range of activities to suit their individual preferences.

People were cared for by staff who responded to people’s needs resulting in a positive effect on people’s wellbeing. Where people had experienced deterioration in their mobility or suffered with emotional needs there was a consistent approach from staff which resulted in people gaining confidence and independence. People were actively encouraged to be independent and were supported by staff to learn and develop new skills. Professionals spoke positively about staff and the care that people received. Staff recognised people as individual’s and developed ways of ensuring that they had the opportunity to make decisions in their care and felt listened to.

The management oversight of the home was good. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and told us that because of their approach it had created a good ethos and culture within the staff team. Relatives and advocates told us the registered manager provided good leadership for the home. The registered manager also managed another of the provider’s registered homes but demonstrated that this did not diminish their ability to manage Spring Park effectively. Records were well organised, up to date and stored confidentially where necessary.

People were safe because staff understood any risks involved in their care and took action to minimise these risks. The rota was planned to ensure there were sufficient staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. Staff told us that people never missed out on any planned activities because they always ensured there were enough staff available. Staff understood their roles in keeping people safe and protecting them from abuse. The provider carried out appropriate pre-employment checks before staff started work.

Staff maintained a safe environment, including appropriate standards of fire safety. The provider had developed plans to ensure people would continue to receive care in the event of an emergency. People received the medicines they required and the storage and recording of medicines followed best practice. Accidents and incidents were recorded with detailed information about actions taken.

People’s care was provided by staff who had access to the training and support they needed to do their jobs. People were supported to have maximum control of their lives. Staff followed the principals of the Mental Capacity Act which meant they supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were supported by caring staff. Staff treated people with respect and maintained their privacy and dignity. People lived in a homely environment surrounded by their own personal belongings.

There was an appropriate complaints procedure which explained how complaints would be managed and listed agencies people could contact if they were not satisfied with the provider’s response. There had been no complaints since our last inspection.

Team meetings were used to ensure staff were providing consistent care that reflected best practice. Relatives felt communication was good and they and external agencies were asked for their views about the service provided.

The provider’s quality monitoring checks helped ensure people received safe and effective care. Staff made regular in-house checks and the provider’s area manager carried out a monthly audit. The organisation promoted a good culture within the staff team and support and recognised staff.