Campbell Court

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. This is the first inspection for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

People’s individual needs had been appropriately assessed and were fully understood. People were fully involved in planning and reviewing their care package. One person said, “I have a care plan, and they involve me in everything.”

People received a range of ongoing support and had opportunities to feedback about their care. Staff had a good, up to date understanding of people’s needs and regularly checked in with them.

Relatives and external partners had confidence in the ability of the service to assess and act on people’s needs. Admissions were considered through a comprehensive panel process, to ensure people’s needs could be met. One external professional told us, “Springfield Healthcare have shown positive joint working with the other teams involved in the process and have shown a flexible approach in considering people’s needs.”

People received support from staff who knew them well, and who had the right training and support.

The electronic records system in place gave a good baseline of evidence for staff and relevant clinicians to refer to.

Training had regard to good practice and current legislation. It was delivered face to face were beneficial, by the provider’s in-house trainer. Training planning and delivery was based on the skills staff would need to have in the future, and not just the core day-to-day requirements. For instance, staff had recently received autism awareness training and had face to face oxygen training during our inspection visit.

Policies were informed by good practice and current legislation. Staff told us they felt supported and were happy with the level of training provided, which was monitored well to ensure staff knowledge did not become outdated.

Safety was a priority for leaders. The culture was an open one in which concerns could be raised by people, relatives or staff, knowing action would be taken.

Senior leaders met at quarterly meetings to discuss incidents and lessons that could be learned across the organisation. Staff meetings were used to cascade any changes that resulted from investigations or awareness of good practice.

People were involved regarding how their care should be planned and delivered to reduce risks and to increase staff knowledge. One person said, “It’s so lovely. If you have a problem, they sort it out or listen.”

People gave positive feedback about their ability to access meals, and their preferences. People went to local cafes, did their own shopping, and lived as independently as practicable. Staff took an interest in their lifestyles and, whilst respecting choice, encouraged a healthy lifestyle. People were encouraged and supported to take up activities, such as swimming and gardening.

People benefitted from themed events the provider put on, such as a recent Valentines Day, where they could try new meal options. We observed people enjoying the communal aspect of having the option to meet and eat in a shared space.

Safety was a priority for leaders. The culture was an open one in which concerns could be raised by people, relatives or staff, knowing action would be taken.

Senior leaders met at quarterly meetings to discuss incidents and lessons that could be learned across the organisation. Staff meetings were used to cascade any changes that resulted from investigations or awareness of good practice.

People were involved regarding how their care should be planned and delivered to reduce risks and to increase staff knowledge. One person said, “It’s so lovely. If you have a problem, they sort it out or listen.”

Leaders and staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. Staff had received training regarding the MCA and policies were in line with the principles of the MCA.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control over their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. Staff sought consent at each care visit and people and families were involved in decisions about their care. Mental capacity assessments were decision specific.