Springfield House

Updated 14 February 2019

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 5 and 7 December 2018. The first day of inspection was unannounced, the second day was by mutual arrangement. The inspection was completed by one inspector from the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed other information that we held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

We contacted the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams however the local authority did not fund any people at Springfield House. We also contacted the local Healthwatch board. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. We did not receive any negative feedback about this service.

A Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) is a helpful tool inspectors use when it is not possible to find out people's experiences through talking to them. We did not carry out a SOFI as this might have caused unnecessary distress to some of the people living at Springfield House. Instead we made observations of the care and support provided at Springfield House, including interactions between people using the service and staff throughout the inspection.

We spoke with the registered manager, the area manager, and four care staff. We looked at the care files of four people who used the service and records relating to the management of the home including training records, medicine administration records, accident and incidents, quality assurance systems and maintenance records.

Updated 14 February 2019

Springfield House is a service registered to provide care and support for up to four people with a learning disability. Some people may also have a physical disability or additional mental health needs. The service is a large house with individual bedrooms and communal areas, such as a lounge, dining room, kitchen and two bathrooms. At the time of this inspection there were four people living at Springfield House.

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

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

At our last inspection in March 2016 we rated the service as good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Why the service is rated good.

People enjoyed living at Springfield House and staff practices helped to keep people safe. Positive interactions between the people at the home and staff were observed during our inspection.

Staff received the training and support, through supervisions and team meetings, to effectively meet people’s needs. Annual observations of staff competencies were completed.

Staffing levels varied depending on the needs of the people and their preferred daily routines. We saw that the registered manager identified occasions when additional staff might be required and approached commissioners if additional funding was needed.

Person centred care plans and risk assessments were in place to guide staff on the support people needed and how to reduce any identified risks. Where applicable, care plans were in place to support specific health conditions, for example autism and epilepsy. Medicines were administered as prescribed.

At this inspection all equipment was maintained and serviced in line with national guidelines. The home was well maintained and clean throughout. Personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) were in place for each person living at Springfield House.

People’s health and nutritional needs were met by the service. People were involved in choosing the varied meals that were cooked and served by staff.

Information about people’s preferences, culture, likes and dislikes was recorded. A description of people’s preferred daily routines was held on their support plans. Staff recognised the importance of routines and how deviating from these might negatively affect people living at Springfield House. They explored new ways of working with people to try and meet their changing needs.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

The registered manager had an auditing system in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. All incidents and accidents were reviewed to reduce the likelihood of a re-occurrence.

The service demonstrated examples of working in partnership with people, their relatives, commissioners, and health professionals. The service engaged with people where possible and used all forms of feedback to continuously improve the service to ensure people living at Springfield House were appropriately supported and had a good quality of life.