Spring Fountain (Private) Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

There were processes to ensure people received care and support that met their preferences. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed to ensure people’s needs continued to be met, whist ensuring people continued to have maximum choice and control over their support. People told us they had a care plan, and they and their relatives were involved in planning their care and support. One relative told us, “They [Spring Fountain] change visit times all the time for us.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The provider liaised with local health services when people’s needs changed.

The service delivers continuity of support so staff can understand people’s preferences and needs. One relative commented, “[Family member] is very comfortable with staff and has formed a strong bond with them.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Care plans guided staff on how to communicate effectively with people. The management team made it easy and accessible for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Relatives told us they felt informed and listened to about their families. People and their relatives told us they felt they had opportunities to share feedback about the support and care they received. All information was stored electronically and password protected. People and relatives could access their information remotely and review their documentation and records of what tasks had been completed.

People told us they knew how to raise a complaint and felt confident the provider would act on their concerns. One person told us, “If we have ever had to complain, [provider] gets it sorted.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were able to engage with the provider choosing times they received their care to meet their needs. If support was delayed, staff would telephone people to inform them they would be late. If people required support to attend appointments the provider would tailor their visits to support them.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People and their relatives told us they had received good outcomes and positive experiences from the staff. One person told us, “I have never known a company like it, so caring, they are amazing, so bloody amazing.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Where people had shared their end of life wishes, these were documented in their care plans. This included DNACPRs. DNACPR stands for ‘Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).’ It means if a person had a cardiac arrest or dies suddenly, there will be guidance on what action should or should not be taken by a healthcare professional, including not performing CPR on the person.

When people’s future care preferences were to be more independent, the provider and staff worked with them and relatives to achieve their goals. One relative said, “When [family member] was on palliative care, staff were absolutely brilliant. They played a major part in their recovery.” A second relative told us staff were critical in planning their family member’s future. They said, “They are keeping him out of hospital.”