Background to this inspection
Updated
11 December 2018
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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 6 November 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.
Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. We reviewed the Provider Information return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give us some key information about the service such as what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. We also looked at previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification tells us important information about events that by law the registered manager is required to inform us about such as safeguarding concerns, serious injuries or deaths that have occurred at the service.
During the inspection, we spoke to 3 people who used the service and two relatives. We spoke with 4 members of staff and the registered manager and we observed how staff engaged with people who used the service.
We looked at one care file and some records that related to the management of the service such as Medication Administration Records (MARs) and training matrixes.
Updated
11 December 2018
Springfield House is a residential care home that is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 35 people who may be living with a physical disability and/or dementia. At the time of our inspection, there were 21 people using the service.
At our last inspection on 12 April 2016, we rated the service overall Good. The key questions Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-Led were rated good. The key question Safe was rated Requires Improvement as medicines were not always managed safely and people were not always protected from the risk of abuse. At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and sustained and now Safe is rated as Good. We found that that evidence continued to support the overall rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating has not changed since our last inspection.
Staff understood their responsibilities and knew how to keep people safe from harm and abuse. People had received their medicines safely, and on time as prescribed. There were enough suitably trained staff to meet people’s needs and risks were managed effectively in line with their care plans. People were protected from the risk of the spread of infection.
People were encouraged and supported to make choices about the way in which they received their care and staff supported people in the least restrictive way possible. People had their nutritional needs met and people had the necessary access to healthcare. People were treated with kindness and compassion and people had their privacy respected and dignity upheld.
People had their needs assessed and planned for and people received care that was personalised and responsive to their individual needs. People participated in meaningful activities and end of life wishes were considered and planned for.
The registered manager understood the conditions of registration with us and people felt that the registered manager was friendly and approachable.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.