Archived: Springhill Care Home

Springhill Care Home is a nursing and residential care home which provides nursing and personal care to up to 116 people. The home has a nursing unit, a residential unit and a separate three floor unit for people living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 109 people were living at the home.

People’s experience of using this service:

People using the service and their relatives were happy with the care and support provided at Springhill Care Home.

The provider followed safe processes when recruiting staff to ensure they were suitable to support adults at risk. Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of abuse or avoidable harm. The service managed people’s risks and medicines in a safe way. Staff followed appropriate infection control procedures and we found the home clean. The provider ensured safety checks of the home environment were completed regularly. Most people told us they were happy with staffing levels at the home. However, some people told us staff were not always available when they needed support, especially in the morning. We discussed this with the registered manager and the provider and shortly after our inspection the provider increased staffing levels to ensure staff were able to support people when they needed it.

Staff supported people in a way which met their needs. People felt staff had the knowledge and skills to support them well. Staff were happy with the induction they received when they joined the service and their training was updated regularly. Staff completed mental capacity assessments in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and consulted people’s relatives when people were unable to make decisions about their care. When people needed to be deprived of their liberty to keep them safe, the service applied to the local authority for authorisation to do this. The service had a strong focus on supporting people to eat and drink well. Staff supported people to achieve and maintain good health and referred people to community professionals when they needed extra support.

People liked the staff who supported them. They told us staff were kind and treated them with respect. Staff considered people’s diversity and provided people with any support they needed with their communication needs. Staff respected people’s right to privacy and dignity and encouraged people to be independent when it was safe to do so. People told us staff had discussed their care needs with them and they were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided people with information about local advocacy services, to ensure they received support to express their views if they needed to.

Staff provided people with care that reflected their needs and preferences. Staff created personalised care plans, which they updated when people’s needs or risks changed. Staff were familiar with people’s needs and how they liked to be supported. Staff offered people choices and encouraged them to make decisions about their care when they could. No formal complaints had been received by the service. Three people told us they had raised concerns with staff about delays in providing them with support, but no improvements had been made. The provider and registered manager told us this had not been raised with them prior to the inspection, or in recent satisfaction surveys or during residents' meetings. The provider took action when we raised these concerns with them.

The registered manager, management team and provider were passionate about providing people with high quality, person-centred care. They worked hard to keep up to date with good practice, which enhanced the care people received, resulting in better outcomes for people living at the home. Community professionals gave us very positive feedback about the management of the home and the quality of the care staff provided. The home had achieved the platinum Investors in People award, which is currently held by only 1% of IIP accredited organisations. People, relatives and staff were happy with how the service was being managed. Staff felt well supported by the management team and told us they would be happy for a family member to live at the home.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated good (published 21 October 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Springhill Care Home provides accommodation, personal care and nursing care for up to 116 people, including people living with dementia. At the time of this inspection there were 107 people living at the home.

The service is a mainly purpose built care home. There are three dementia units over three floors and an additional residential unit and nursing unit. Accommodation is provided mainly in single en-suite rooms. There are a small number of double occupancy rooms. The grounds and gardens have accessible seating areas for people living at the home. The home is situated close to the small town of Oswaldtwistle in East Lancashire.

At the time of our inspection the service had a registered manager, who had been registered with the Commission as the manager of the service since October 2015. 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 legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

As part of our inspection we have made a recommendation about the management of medicines at the service.

There were appropriate policies and procedures in place for managing medicines. However, we found that medicines were not always stored safely.

People living at the home told us they received safe care. Most people living at the home felt that staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs.

We saw evidence that staff had been recruited safely. The staff we spoke with understood how to safeguard vulnerable adults from abuse and what action to take if they suspected abuse was taking place.

People told us they were happy with the care they received and felt that staff could meet their needs. We found that staff received an appropriate induction and effective training when they joined the service. Staff told us they received regular supervision.

Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The service had taken appropriate action where people lacked the capacity to make decisions about their care.

The people we spoke with told us they were involved in decisions about their care and their care needs were reviewed regularly.

People living at the home and their relatives were happy with quality of the food provided. They told us they had lots of choice.

We received positive feedback about from community healthcare professionals who were involved with the service.

We observed staff communicating with people in a kind and caring way. People told us staff respected their privacy and dignity and encouraged them to be independent.

Activities were provided by dedicated activities co-ordinators and people told us they were happy with the activities available at the home.

We saw evidence that the registered manager requested feedback about the service from people living at the home and acted on the feedback received.

People told us they thought the home was well managed. They felt that the management team were approachable.

Many aspects of care at the home were audited regularly to ensure that appropriate standards of care and safety were maintained.

We saw that members of staff were courteous and attentive to people's needs. One person said, 'I'm looked after incredibly well, the staff are angels.' Another person said, 'They are very good at looking after you.' The relative of one person said, 'I cannot speak highly enough of the care.'

We found that the home was clean, tidy and free from offensive odours. Procedures and training for all members of staff was in place for the prevention and control of infection.

We noted that recruitment procedures were thorough in order to protect people from the employment of unsuitable staff.

We saw that systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. There was evidence to demonstrate that people were regularly consulted about the care and facilities provided at the home.

We found that suitable arrangements were in place for the safe keeping and handling of medicines.

We saw that members of staff were usually available to assist people when necessary and supervise people with a dementia.

We saw that appropriate and accurate records were kept for people using the service and the overall effective management of the home.