Archived: Springfield Park

Springfield Park is a residential care home which provides accommodation for up to 30 older people, who require support and personal care; some of whom have dementia. At the time of the inspection, there were 23 people in receipt of care from the service.

The inspection took place on 18 and 19 November 2015 and was unannounced.

The manager, who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in July 2015, was on duty during our inspection, as was a team of care workers and domestic staff. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding procedures and there were systems in place for staff to report any concerns to the manager. People told us they felt safe and that they liked the staff who provided their care. Incidents which had taken place were documented and the manager had taken appropriate action in a timely manner.

Risks people faced in their daily lives had been assessed and documented within people’s individual care files. Steps had been taken to ensure actions to mitigate risk were available for staff to follow. These assessments were reviewed monthly and there was evidence that changes to people’s needs were cascaded to staff through team meetings and key worker sessions.

There were enough staff employed at the service to meet the needs of the people who lived there. Staff files showed that the service safely recruited suitable people into their roles. Staff had a mix of skills, knowledge and experience to meet individual needs. The manager ensured that competency checks were carried out regularly and staff told us they were encouraged to develop professionally.

Medication were managed safely and securely stored. A senior care worker was responsible for administering medication and thorough records were kept to document this. One person said, “They are always there when you need them, they give me my medicine when I need it. I think they are wonderful”. The service had recently introduced daily auditing of Medicine Administration Records (MARs) to ensure any anomalies were highlighted and dealt with immediately. Staff displayed knowledge and competency regarding the management of medicines, including the administration of medicines covertly, for people assessed under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as requiring this level of support. Best interest decisions had been documented in each MARs to document the necessary action required by staff.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) including the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), and to report on what we find. The Manager told us there were several people living in the service who were subject to a DoLS. Records showed these decisions had been made in the person’s best interests and had involved other healthcare professionals.

Communal areas of home was clean and pleasant. The service employed domestic staff for cleaning and maintaining the home. We observed staff followed national patient safety guidance and used colour coding equipment to clean in different specified areas of the home. The bedrooms we were invited to observe were also clean and tidy.

Meals were well-balanced and nutritious. The menu was varied and people were given a choice of food options if they did not like the meal prepared. Snacks and hot drinks were served twice a day and cold drinks were available at all times in the lounge areas. We observed staff encouraged people to drink and offered people cups of tea throughout the day in addition to the set times. Staff listened to people’s preferences and offered them choices.

Staff were recruited safely, well trained and supported in their role through regular supervision, appraisal and staff meetings.

It was evident that the staff cared about the people who lived at the service. They treated people with kindness and compassion and staff were able to tell us about people’s life histories and individual preferences. We observed lots of positive interactions between staff and people throughout a variety of different activities. Staff were continually promoting socialisation and they encouraged people to interact with each other as well as the activity. On the upper floor, the décor had been improved to provide stimulation to people with dementia care needs. Doors were painted different colours and had laminated photographs fixed to them to help people identify their own room. The manager had recently introduced memory boxes which were on display outside each bedroom.

Care plans were in place for each person and they contained detailed information about the individual. There was evidence that the staff were working in partnership with external healthcare professionals and other agencies to achieve the best outcome for people. Care files contained hospital passports and the Alzheimer’s Society “This is me” document, so that personal information would travel with people if they needed to leave the service. Care plans were reviewed monthly by keyworkers and changes were shared with the staff team through team meetings.

The manager kept robust records, such as those related to complaints, accidents and incidents. These records showed investigations had taken place and where necessary action plans were drafted to manage the situation and prevent repeat events. The manager also had a record of relevant people she had informed including the local authority and CQC.

The manager was proactive with quality monitoring. There were a number of audits in place to monitor that the service was providing safe, quality care. Where issues had arisen, action plans were in place to address these.