CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Springfield House
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 09 October 2019 by one inspector. The inspector met three of the four people living there, spoke with staff and a visitor, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records. Further information was gathered from health and social care professionals after the visit.
Inspectors found people were comfortable and relaxed. Staff understood their needs, provided kind and respectful support, managed medicines safely, and helped people access healthcare, activities, holidays and relationships. The home was warm, clean and comfortable.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 3 May 2017. The report says the inspection was planned because of the previous rating.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff offering patient support while protecting people's privacy, dignity and independence.
“We observed kind and patient support being provided. Staff supported people in a respectful way.” from the report
Good knowledge of people's needs
The staff team understood people's individual needs and used care plans and observations to support choices, including for people who did not communicate verbally.
“Team members understood people's needs very well and were experience in their roles.” from the report
Safe medicines and health support
Medicines were managed safely and people were helped to see GPs, nurses and other health specialists when needed.
“Medicines were ordered, stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People had planned activities, day trips and holidays. Relatives and friends could visit and staff helped people keep in touch.
“People went on regular day trips and on holidays several times a year.” from the report
Good partnership working
Health and social care professionals told inspectors that staff worked well with them and responded to changing needs.
“The staff work with us and the care is over and above what you would expect in a care home” from the report
End-of-life training was due to be updated
minorStaff said they were planning to update their end-of-life training, although they felt confident supporting people appropriately.
“Staff said they were planning to update their training on this but felt confident that they could support people appropriately.” from the report
- 01Has the planned update to end-of-life training been completed, and what training do staff now have?
- 02How is care covered when the family staff members are not in the home?
- 03How will you support my relative to communicate choices if they do not communicate verbally?
- 04What activities, trips and holidays would my relative be able to take part in?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in care planning and best-interest decisions?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the home, care and records examined; three of the four people living there were met by the inspector. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good overall; inspectors found effective care, but the well-led rating was Requires Improvement because the home was not meeting its registration requirements.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 26 September 2018. Inspectors looked only at whether the home was effective and well-led. They reviewed records, spoke with one person, four staff and outside professionals, and checked the building and care records.
The effective rating was Good. People received suitable food and drink, staff had completed required training, and people's rights were supported. Inspectors also found clean premises, health checks and care planning to support people's wellbeing.
The well-led rating was Requires Improvement. The home was registered for three people, but a fourth person sometimes stayed for respite care informally. The registered manager agreed to apply to change the registration. The other three question ratings were not inspected and were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection.
Food and drink
People had support plans for food and drink. They were weighed regularly, and specialist advice was requested when needed.
“The provider ensured people's nutritional needs were being met. We saw everyone had support plans relating to food and drink.” from the report
Staff training
Records showed that staff and volunteers had completed the training the provider considered mandatory.
“Records confirmed that staff and volunteers had completed training the provider deemed mandatory.” from the report
Health support
People were supported with GP, dental and hospital appointments. Their care plans included information about ongoing medical conditions.
“Support plans contained information about any long standing medical problems and people were supported to go to hospital appointments.” from the report
Caring culture
Inspectors saw a small team that discussed the service regularly and showed genuine affection for the people they supported.
“The staff team was small and met regularly to discuss the service.” from the report
Registration limit
needs fixingThe home was registered for up to three people, but a fourth person occasionally stayed for respite care on an informal basis. The manager agreed to apply to change the registration.
“As the service was not meeting registration requirements at the time of our inspection we are only able to rate well led as requires improvement.” from the report
- 01Was the application made to change the registration from three people to include occasional respite stays?
- 02What arrangements are now in place when someone stays for respite care?
- 03How does the home check that it is meeting its registration requirements?
- 04How are decisions made and recorded when a person may lack capacity?
- 05How are people's food, drink and weight monitored when their needs change?
This was a focused inspection of Effective and Well-led only; Safe, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 December 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Springfield House
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Cumberland
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.