• Care Home
  • Care home

Springwood

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

611 Herries Road, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S5 8TN (0114) 232 5472

Provided and run by:
SheffCare Limited

Report from 16 April 2025 assessment

On this page

Well-led

Good

28 May 2025

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

Good: This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 3

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities. Staff were able to explain the values of the service and understood how these values applied to their role. Staff told us that managers listened and communicated with them, to promote a culture of collaboration. One staff member told us, “Yes, we are kept up to date regularly with any changes within the service and they [managers] listen to what we have to say.”

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 3

The registered manager was inclusive and understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. The registered manager had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. One person told us, “The manager is nice and approachable, I’d have no issues raising a complaint if there were any."

Freedom to speak up

Score: 3

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff understood whistleblowing procedures and told us they felt confident bringing areas of concern to managers attention. One staff member told us, “I’ve never had to whistle-blow, but I would feel comfortable doing so, knowing what I’d say would be listened to.” Relatives also told us that managers listened to their concerns, would act promptly and provide reassurance.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 3

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. Processes were in place which helped to protect the rights of staff under the Equality Act. This helped to create amore equitable and inclusive organisation. There was also evidence of reasonable adjustments, for staff who required them.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 2

The manager had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and governance. However, we identified some audits had not identified shortfalls we found. These included environmental checks, such as the risks and management of Asbestos. The provider had assured us that they are in the process of reviewing how these environmental checks are being audited, to ensure robust checks and risks are managed going forwards.

Partnerships and communities

Score: 3

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. Professionals were positive about the service’s ability to work in partnership. A professional told us, “Our relationship with the seniors and management is very positive, the staff appear invested in people’s well-being.”

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 3

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research. Lessons were continuously learnt where incidents had occurred. Staff had opportunities to give feedback and contribute to the overall development of the service.