Archived: Springvale Resource Centre

The service were last inspected in May 2014 when the service met all the regulations we inspected.

We undertook this inspection on 01 June 2016. This comprehensive inspection was unannounced and conducted by one inspector.

The service had a registered manager. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff we spoke with were aware of how to protect vulnerable people and had safeguarding policies and procedures to guide them which included the contact details of the local authority to report to.

Recruitment procedures were robust and ensured new staff should be safe to work with vulnerable adults.

The administration of medicines was safe. Staff had been trained in the administration of medicines and had up to date policies and procedures to follow. Their competency was checked regularly.

People who used the service told us the food was good and they had the opportunity to learn how to cook and plan meals.

Electrical and gas appliances were serviced regularly. Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan (PEEP) and there was a business plan for any unforeseen emergencies.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection. Staff were trained in infection control and provided with the necessary equipment and hand washing facilities to help protect their health and welfare.

Most staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager was aware of her responsibilities of how to apply for any best interest decisions under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and followed the correct procedures using independent professionals.

New staff received induction training to provide them with the skills to care for people. Staff files and the training matrix showed staff had undertaken sufficient training to meet the needs of people and they were supervised regularly to check their competence. Supervision sessions also gave staff the opportunity to discuss their work and ask for any training they felt necessary.

We observed there were good interactions between staff and people who used the service. People told us staff were kind, knowledgeable and caring.

We saw that the quality of care plans gave staff sufficient information to look after people accommodated at the care home and they were regularly reviewed. Plans of care contained people’s personal preferences so they could be treated as individuals.

There was a record kept of any complaints and we saw the manager took action to investigate any concerns, incidents or accidents to reach satisfactory outcomes. There had not been any complaints since the last inspection.

Staff and people who used the service told us managers were approachable and supportive.

Staff meetings gave staff the opportunity to be involved in the running of the home and discuss their training needs.

If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. One person said, 'I'm treated well.' The members of staff spoken with understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported.

The manager had received training about the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and knew the procedure to follow if a person was unable to make decisions for themselves.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations.

We saw that the home was clean, tidy and free from offensive odours. Cleaning schedules were in place for all areas of the home including the kitchen to ensure that a high standard of cleanliness was maintained. There have been no recent outbreaks of infection at the home.

Members of staff had received training in the management of medication and knew how to safely give medicines to people who used the service.

Is the service effective?

People's personal and health care needs and abilities were assessed with them and their relatives and they were involved in writing their care plans. Specialist dietary needs had been identified in care plans where required. We saw that care plans were reviewed regularly and amended to reflect people's changing needs. People were registered with a GP and had access to specialists and other healthcare professionals when necessary. People were accompanied by members of staff to attend healthcare appointments.

People new to the service were given a welcome pack which provided detailed information about the home and the support people could expect to receive from members of staff.

Discussion with care workers and examination of records confirmed that a rolling programme of training was in place so that all members of staff were kept up to date with current practice.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that members of staff spoke to people in a courteous and friendly manner.

People's preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes. One person told us they received all the help and support they needed from members of staff.

People who used the service and their relatives were given the opportunity to regularly complete satisfaction questionnaires. The most recent surveys carried out in March this year indicated that people were satisfied with the care and facilities provided at the home.

Is the service responsive?

People's independence was promoted and they were encouraged to pursue their own interests and hobbies. People were also supported by staff to access amenities in the local community such as the shops, ten pin bowling and nearby parks.

People met weekly with their key worker to discuss their support needs and plan leisure activities. An individual weekly activities plan was in place for people who wanted a written record of planned events for the coming week.

People knew they could raise any concerns with the manager or members of staff at any time. They could also discuss any issues at the regular meetings with their key worker.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way. We saw that there was a system for sharing essential information, for example if the person required admission to hospital in an emergency.

There were systems in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service provided. We saw that audits completed regularly by the manager covered all aspects of the service provided.

Discussion with members of staff confirmed that they had received appropriate training and understood their roles and responsibilities. This helped to ensure that people who used the service received the care and support they needed. Members of staff told us the manager was approachable and supportive.

The person told us he felt the environment was fine for his needs and mostly felt safe at the home. He told us the staff were 'Supportive, helpful and went with him to gigs.'

The person we spoke with didn't have any need to make a complaint, but felt that he would be listened to if he did.