Background to this inspection
Updated
2 March 2022
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.
As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.
This inspection took place on 22 February 2022 and was announced. We gave the service notice of the inspection.
Updated
2 March 2022
About the service: Springfield is a development of ten properties located in a residential area in Bromley, Kent. It compromises of a large main building with six flats and four bungalows in the external grounds. The service is a registered care home offering care and support for up to eleven physically disabled adults who want to live as independently as possible. People have varying levels of need and support is available 24 hours. The focus of the service is on encouraging people's independence, well- being and involvement in their community. At the time of our inspection eleven people were using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿ The service applied the values and principles of CQC guidance ‘Registering the Right Support’ (RRS). People were enabled to make choices about their lives and were supported to be as independent as possible. RRS guidance works to ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes including control, choice and independence.
¿ People spoke positively about the service and said staff were caring and supportive. They told us they felt safe and their needs were very well met.
¿ Throughout our inspection we observed staff interacted with people, had good relationship’s and rapport with individuals and staff were kind and caring in their approach.
¿ The service had safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures and how to keep people safe.
¿ People's needs and preferences were assessed and where risks were identified, plans were in place to manage risks safely in the least restrictive way possible.
¿ There were safe arrangements in place to manage medicines and staff followed appropriate infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections.
¿ Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work.
¿ There was sufficient staff available to meet people's needs promptly and to ensure they could go out with support when they wanted to.
¿ Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people appropriately. Staff were appropriately supported through induction, training and regular supervision.
¿ People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet.
¿ 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 support this practice.
¿ People told us staff treated them in a kind, caring and respectful manner.
¿ People were fully involved in and consulted about their care and support needs.
¿ People had access to health and social care professionals as required.
¿ People were supported to access community service and to participate in activities of their choosing that met their needs.
¿ Staff worked with people to promote their rights and understood the Equality Act 2010 supporting people appropriately addressing any protected characteristics.
¿ There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.
¿ The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals and other organisations to plan and deliver an effective service.
¿ The service took people, their relatives and staff’s views into account through surveys and informal feedback to help drive service improvements.
Rating at last inspection: Good (Report was published on 6 September 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. We found the service continued to meet the characteristics of Good in all areas.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit in line with our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect the service sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the website at www.cqc.org.uk