You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Springfield House. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.
All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 3 December 2013
Date of Publication: 7 January 2014
Inspection Report published 07 January 2014 PDF | 79.35 KB

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 3 December 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and talked with commissioners of services.

Our judgement

People's privacy was respected. Views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

On the day we inspected the service one person was attending a local day centre, another person had no verbal communication. Where people used non-verbal communication it was described in their care plan. We observed how staff interpreted people's communication. They demonstrated they knew how to communicate and did this is a sensitive and caring way.

By speaking with a person living at the service and going through their support plan, it was clear they were involved in decisions about their care and support. They could make choices. The day we visited the same person had chosen to stay in bed until later in the morning. The provider told us they had the choice as to what time they get up and go to bed.

We saw where people had no verbal communication staff were focused on ways to communicate. This was done by observation of actions displayed by the person when they required attention. This meant that those responsible for care and support understood, respected and implemented people's choices.

The provider and daughter in law were available to support people whenever they required support. They told us, “We know everyone’s needs and can respond individually”.

All three people had their own bedrooms which were personalised. One person liked to use this room to watch television and spend time alone. This was their choice and respected. This meant that people had private space if they wished to spend time alone and privacy for personal care.

People chose what activities they wished to take part in both inside and out of the home. On the day of our visit one person was at day centre. A planned trip to Carlisle had been put on hold until the following day. The provider knew what people liked to take part in and what they did not enjoy. This meant people attended activities of their choice and this was respected.