Springwood

Updated 11 December 2021

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 carried out by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Springwood 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

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that people would be in during the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection-

We are improving how we hear people’s experience and views on services, when they have limited verbal communication. We have trained some CQC team members to use a symbol-based communication tool. We checked that this was a suitable communication method and that people were happy to use it with us. We did this by reading their care and communication plans and speaking to staff or relatives and the person themselves. In this report, we used this communication tool with one person to tell us their experience

We also spoke with two other people about their experience of the care provided and reviewed recent feedback from a relative and a health care professional. We spoke with six members of staff including the regional manager, the registered manager, a senior support worker and three support workers. We also carried out observations in communal areas.

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

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data, quality assurance records, health and safety records, other support plans and policies and procedures.

Updated 11 December 2021

About the service

Springwood is a care home which provides personal care for up to six people living with a learning disability and/or autism. At the time of this inspection there were five people living in the home.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of Right support, right care, right culture.

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

People were very happy and content living in the home and described staff as “wonderful” and “perfect.” They received person-centred care where they were at the heart and focus of the support provided to achieve positive outcomes. One person talking about their journey since moving into the home said, “I’m in a better place [now], the best I have been for a long time.”

People were kept safe. Staff were confident in protecting people from abuse. Risks were well managed. The provider learned from previous accidents and incidents to reduce future risks. Staff were recruited in a safe way and there were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs. Arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines. Infection control processes were embedded into the service and staff followed government guidance in relation to infection control and prevention practices, in particular, relating to COVID-19.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and annual appraisals. People were supported with their nutritional needs and to access a range of health care professionals. 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 supported this practice.

Staff were respectful towards people and supported them in a dignified way. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and develop daily living skills. People received support from appropriate advocacy services, when needed.

Support plans were detailed and reflected people’s individual needs and choices. People’s communication needs were detailed within support plans and staff knew how to communicate with them effectively. Staff involved people and their relatives when planning support and activities which incorporated people’s interests and wishes. The provider had a complaints procedure in place that was available in suitable formats for people.

An effective quality assurance process was in place. Key stakeholders were regularly consulted about the quality of the service. Staff were involved in the ongoing development and improvement of the service through regular meetings as well as daily communication. The registered manager was open and approachable to all.

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 30 August 2019).

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach.

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.