Archived: Springfield Retirement Home Limited

Updated 3 September 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

This inspection took place on 12 August 2020 and was announced. The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

Updated 3 September 2020

Springfield Retirement Home provides care and accommodation for up to 15 people. At the time of the inspection 13 people were living at the home. The home is situated in the Bare area of Morecambe. It is close to a number of facilities and amenities. The building is on two floors with a stair lift for access to the first floor. The Promenade and Happy Mount Park are within easy reach.

Springfield Retirement Home is a ‘care home.’ People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, both of which we looked at during this inspection.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

At the last inspection in December 2015, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection, we found the service remained ‘Good’.

During the inspection visit we observed staff provided support for people in a sensitive and caring way. For example one person who lived at the home said, “Very caring and respectful they treat everyone so well.” A relative wrote in a survey ‘Excellent care’.

Risk assessments in care records of people who lived at Springfield had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Care records showed they were reviewed and any changes had been recorded.

We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required. Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection. We found supplies were available for staff to use when required. Medication documentation in care plans provided staff with a good understanding about specific requirements of each person who lived at Springfield. Also staff had relevant training to assist them in the safe administration of medicines. This was confirmed by talking with staff.

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.

We confirmed people who lived at the home had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met. Care records seen confirmed visits to and from General Practitioners (GP’s) and other healthcare professionals had been recorded.

People who lived at the home spoke positively about the standard of food provided. People only made positive comments about the quality of meals and food provided. They included, “Food is very good. We are fortunate to have a very good cook.”

Staff knew people they supported and provided a personalised service in a caring way. This was confirmed by talking with people who lived at the home and relatives. Care plans were organised and had identified care and support people required. We found by conversations with staff they had a good understanding of protecting and respecting people’s human rights. They were able to describe the importance of respecting each person as an individual. One staff member said, “The culture at this home is everyone is treated the same way with compassion and care no matter what background or religion they are.”

People who lived at the home told us there were a variety of activities which were organised for their entertainment. These included exercise classes, dominoes, entertainers from the community and film afternoons with refreshments. One person who lived at the home said, “Sometimes if I come in the afternoon they have all sorts of activities going on.”

We found there was information available with regards to support from an external advocate should this be required by them.

Springfield had a complaints procedure which was made available to people on their admission to the home and their relatives. People we spoke with told us they had no complaints.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits and resident/staff meetings to seek their views about the service provided.