Springside

Springside is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 8 people in a large family home in a residential area. At the time of our inspection there were 5 people using the service. The service provides support to people who had a range of mild to moderate learning disabilities. Most people were able to carry out their own personal care with prompting and support from staff.

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

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. 'Right support, right care, right culture' is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Support

Risks to people were not always properly assessed to protect them from avoidable harm. Not all environmental risks for people using the service had been assessed as safe.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their needs. However, care plans and risk assessments were not always up to date. The registered manager was responsive to our feedback and took action to address the issues identified.

People lived in a service impacted by the death of a person who had lived at the home for a long time. People and staff were being supported with this.

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. During the inspection we observed staff supporting people to be independent and have control over their own lives.

People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing. Staff enabled people to access specialist health and social care support in the community. Staff supported people with their medicines in a way that achieved the best possible health outcome.

Right Care

People received support from staff who were not always trained appropriately to support people.

People received their medicines in line with their preferences by staff who knew people well. Staff mostly followed systems and processes to safely administer medicines, however improvements were needed to ensure medicines were stored safely, and staff received appropriate training and competency assessments.

People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people’s privacy and dignity. They understood and responded to their individual needs.

People could communicate with staff and understand information given to them because staff supported them consistently and understood their individual communication needs. Staff were observed communicating with people in ways that met their needs and supported people to make choices.

Right Culture

Improvements were needed to make sure there were effective systems to monitor the quality of the service and plan improvements.

The registered manager was open and transparent throughout our inspection. They acted on queries and our feedback throughout the inspection.

People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff. Throughout the inspection we observed that staff were respectful of people and took time to offer support and reassurance when needed.

Staff and the management team at the service spoke positively about people within the service and wanted people to live their best lives. Staff demonstrated their knowledge of people and placed people's wishes, needs, and rights at the heart of everything they did.

Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well.

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 20 March 2018)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified breaches in relation to risk management and the management of the service at this inspection.

We have also made recommendations in relation to medicines and infection control.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Most people had a range of mild to moderate learning disabilities, but one person had complex learning and physical disability needs. Most people were able to carry out their own personal care with prompting and support from staff. People had been involved in planning an individual programme of activities. Some people went out into the community independently although most preferred to be supported by a member of staff. One person was dependent on staff support for all of their care needs. At the time of the inspection there were seven people living in the home.

At the last inspection in October 2015 the service was rated Good. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service was well run by a registered manager who had the skills and experience to run the home so people received high quality person-centred support. The registered manager led a team of staff who shared their commitment to high standards of care and clear vision of the type of home they hoped to create for people. This was to provide a safe, secure and happy environment where each person could be assisted to reach their full potential.

People told us they were supported well at Springside. They said it was “A good place to be” and they “Did very well” in the small, informal environment.The registered manager’s regular contact with people and the size of the home contributed to relaxed family style of care and support.

The provider had systems and processes in place to keep people safe and minimise the risk of abuse. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs in a relaxed manner.People told us they felt safe at the home and with the staff who supported them. They had no worries and were confident they could talk to staff if they had.

The manager and staff were very pro-active in arranging for people to see health care professionals according to their individual needs. Staff noted changes in people’s health and arranged GP visits when required.

People were supported by kind and caring staff. Some people had lived in the home for several years. One relative said “I cannot speak too highly of all involved in the care (of my relative.)They are technically good but also caring and loving.”

People received care that was responsive to their needs and personalised to their wishes and preferences. People were able to make choices about all aspects of their day to day lives.

There were formal and informal quality assurance systems in place to monitor care and plan on-going improvements. There were audits and checks in place to monitor safety and quality of support.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

We observed the service to be effective at supporting people to make independent choices which supported their chosen lifestyles. We spoke with people who lived at the service who were able to tell us they were happy living there. We saw they were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their needs. A wide range of health and social care professionals were also involved in people's support.

We saw medicines were managed safely; people were supported with attendance for healthcare appointments.

We found the service was responsive to people and listened to comments and complaints using them to improve the service. We saw the people who used the service had a good relationship with the manager and were able to raise issues with them.

The manager regularly reviewed the care and support plans with people who used the service. We read people's feedback about the service was positive. We saw there were processes in place which assessed the quality of the service and allowed change to be implemented when needed.

They accessed a wide range of educational, social and leisure activities, outings and work placements. Some people accessed the community without staff support. People were supported to maintain relationships with their friends and family members.

People told us they liked the staff who supported them and staff understood what care and support they needed. One person said 'The staff are very good actually. They are caring. They know what help I need.'

They told us they felt safe living in the home. People knew who to speak to if they were worried or upset. One person said "I have never been upset or unhappy. I can speak to the staff if I am." Another person told us "It is a safe place to live. I would talk to the staff if I was worried but I haven't been worried about anything."

People knew they could complain if they were unhappy about any aspect of their care or the home more generally. No concerns were raised with us during our inspection. Everyone spoke very highly of the home. One person said 'I have lived here for years. It's nice living here. We can chat to the staff if anything worries or upsets us.'