Springfield House

Updated 9 May 2019

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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team: One inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

Service and service type: Springfield House is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and personal care. 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 two working days’ notice of the inspection site visit because some of the people using it needed support to understand and prepare for our visit.

What we did: We reviewed information we had received about the service since they were registered. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse. We sought feedback from the local authority and other professionals who work with the service. We had not requested the provider submit to us a PIR by the time of our inspection. A PIR is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with three people and two relatives to ask about their experiences of the care provided. Not all people in the service were able to provide detailed verbal feedback. We also observed the support staff provided. We spoke with six members of care staff. This included; four support workers, the assistant manager and the registered manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and two people’s medicine records. We also looked at three staff files, records relating to training and supervision of staff, and records relating to the management of the home.

Following our site visit we reviewed additional information we had requested the registered manager send to us.

Updated 9 May 2019

About the service: Springfield House is a residential care home that was providing personal care to five adults with a learning disability at the time of the inspection. Accommodation for people using the service was provided on the ground floor with four bedrooms having en-suite bathrooms. The fifth bedroom is housed within an annex which has its own separate living room and bathroom. The ground floor contained a kitchen, living and dining room, and conservatory. The office and a bedroom for staff to use was situated upstairs. There was a secure garden accessed from the back of the building.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support as it promoted and enabled choice, control, independence, and inclusion.

¿People received safe care and support from consistent and caring staff who knew them well.

¿Some minor improvements regarding the recording of medicines and the maintenance of some pieces of equipment were required.

¿People were supported to be healthy, this included meeting their nutritional needs and supporting people to access health care services.

¿People were involved in the planning of the care needs and were able to discuss this on a regular basis. This included planning a range of social activities and outings.

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

¿The service was well managed. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities, and worked well together.

¿The management team were open, transparent, and responsive. They took timely action to make improvements where any issues were identified.

¿All the people, relatives, and staff we spoke with were happy with the quality of the service provided.

Rating at last inspection: This was the service’s first rating inspection following the registration of the service in May 2018.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on when the service was first registered.

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