Springfield Care Centre

Updated 6 November 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service had been identified for use by the Local Authority as a designated care setting in response to the Winter Plan for people discharged from hospital with a positive Covid-19 status. This inspection was to ensure that the service was compliant with infection control and prevention measures.

This inspection took place on 26 October 2020 and was announced.

Updated 6 November 2020

Springfield Care Centre is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Springfield Care Centre can accommodate 80 older and younger adults who may have dementia in a purpose built three storey building. People were accommodated across six units on the ground and first floor. At the time of this inspection, 72 people were using the service.

This inspection took place on 28 and 29 August and 5 September 2018. The inspection was unannounced. This was the first inspection since the service was registered under the provider Bondcare (London) Limited in July 2017.

The service did not have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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. At the time of this inspection there was a manager in position who had applied to become registered with CQC.

There were enough staff on duty to meet people’s needs but occasionally the service was short staffed. Recruitment checks were carried out before new staff began working at the service. People had risk assessments carried out to mitigate the risks of harm they may face and were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. There were systems in place to manage medicines safely. Building safety checks were carried out in line with building safety requirements. The provider used accidents and incidents to make improvements to the service.

People’s care needs were assessed before they began to use the service to ensure the provider could meet their needs. Staff received training and were supported with supervisions and appraisals to help them to carry out their role effectively. The provider had systems in place for staff to be updated on people’s well-being and changes in care needs. The layout and décor of the building could be confusing for some people to find their way around. The provider was in the process of refurbishing the building. People were supported to eat a nutritionally balanced diet and to maintain their health. The provider understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (2005). Staff understood the need to obtain consent before delivering care.

Staff described how they developed caring relationship with people. People and their relatives were involved in decisions about the care. The provider had a system in place where each person had a named nurse and care worker who had overall responsibility for the person’s care. There was a ‘resident of the day’ system where each person had a day dedicated to them to make them feel special. Staff were knowledgeable about equality and diversity. People were supported to maintain their independence and their privacy and dignity was promoted.

Care plans were personalised, contained people’s preferences and were reviewed monthly. Staff knew how to deliver a personalised care service. People were offered a variety of activities and their communication needs were met. Complaints were dealt with appropriately and compliments were recorded. People’s end of life care preferences were recorded.

People, relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the leadership in the service. The provider had a system to obtain feedback about the service in order to make improvements. People, relatives and staff had regular meetings so they could be updated on service development and make suggestions for improvements. The provider had quality audit systems in place to identify areas for improvement. However, call bell response times and care plan checks were not taking place at the time of inspection.

We have made two recommendations in relation to the refurbishment of the building and quality assurance systems.