Archived: Springfield House

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

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.

Springfield House provides care and support for people living with a learning disability and behaviours that may challenge others. The service has 10 en-suite rooms and is situated close to the beach, with good public transport links.

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection the service was rated ‘Good’.

Rating at this inspection

At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

Why the service was rated ‘Good’

People felt safe living at Springfield House. They continued to be supported by enough, safely recruited, trained and knowledgeable staff. People were protected from the risks of abuse, discrimination and avoidable harm. Risks to people were identified and managed without restricting people.

Staff were mentored and coached and completed regular training to keep up to date with best practice. The registered manager and staff also used guidance from professional organisations to keep up to date.

The service was clean and well maintained. People were involved in making decisions about the décor in the service and in the day to day running of the service. People were involved in planning the menus and were supported to prepare and cook meals. They had access to health and social care professionals and staff provided support to make sure their day to day health and well-being needs were met. Medicines were managed safely.

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. People’s physical, emotional, social and cultural needs were assessed and reviewed.

People were well supported to move into and out of the service. Staff worked with external agencies to ensure that any move was well co-ordinated. People were supported by staff who were compassionate and caring. People and staff had built strong relationships. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and promoted.

People were involved in writing their care and support plans and setting goals. People’s choices for their end of life care were discussed and recorded to make sure staff could follow their wishes.

People stayed busy and active. They followed their interests and some people went to college or had a job.

People said they would speak to the registered manager or staff if were worried about anything and felt comfortable and confident to do so. There was an accessible complaints procedure. The service continued to be well-led by the registered manager. There was an open and transparent culture at the service which was promoted by the registered manager and staff.

Regular checks and audits were carried out and action was taken to remedy any identified shortfalls. People, relatives, staff and health professionals were encouraged to provide feedback on the day to day running of the service.

All services that provide health and social care to people are required to inform CQC of events that happen, such as a serious accident, so CQC can check that appropriate action was taken to prevent people from harm. The registered manager notified CQC and the local authority in a timely manner.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

There were ten people using the service at the time of our inspection. We observed to see how people reacted and responded to see if people indicated they were happy, bored, discontented, angry or sad. People said they were happy at Springfield House. One person said, 'I am pretty happy here. I can do a lot of things myself but sometimes I need a bit of help'.

We saw that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Care was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. We saw that the service worked closely with health and social care professionals to improve people's health and well-being.

The provider had provided an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. The home was clean and free from offensive odours.

There were enough skilled, qualified and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

Systems were in place to monitor the service that people received to ensure that the service was satisfactory and safe.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service. This was because the people had complex needs which meant they were not all able to tell us their experiences.

We spoke to some people and also observed the interactions between the people and the staff. We observed how people responded and reacted with the staff and we observed to see if people indicated they were happy, bored, discontented, angry or sad.

People told us or expressed that they felt safe, happy, and well looked after. We saw staff engaging with people in a caring, sensitive and positive manner.

People's health needs were supported and the service worked with health professionals to maintain and improve people's health and well being.

Each person had a support plan which showed their likes and dislikes and how and how best to communicate. The staff we spoke to understood each person's individual needs and how they liked to be supported.