Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Springfield Lodge

Goodpublished 25 September 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2022

Rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious safety and leadership failures, despite kind staff and activities for residents.

Inspectors visited on 2 and 5 August 2022. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, accidents, safety checks and management records.

The overall rating was Inadequate. Safe and well-led were rated Inadequate. Effective, caring and responsive were rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found people were at risk because safety checks, medicines systems, care records and management oversight were not reliable.

People and relatives often praised staff as kind, responsive and caring. There were activities, visits and support to maintain relationships. The provider began making changes after the inspection, but CQC said these changes were still developing and had not yet been embedded.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful staff

    People and relatives consistently praised the caring approach. Inspectors saw that privacy, dignity and confidentiality were maintained.

    “People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
  • Enough staff

    Inspectors found enough staff available to support people safely. A well-established core team provided consistent care.

    “There were enough staff available to support people safely.” from the report
  • Activities and relationships

    The home offered varied activities, community trips and one-to-one time. People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends.

    “A varied activities programme was in place to provide people with stimulation and enable them to pursue their interests.” from the report
  • Food and drink

    People had choices about food and drinks, with support available when needed. Feedback about the food was positive.

    “People had choice and control over what they ate and drank. Sufficient food and drinks were available.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Fire and safety checks

    serious

    Fire risks had not been fully addressed, and fire drills had not taken place. The call bell system had also not been serviced or checked.

    “There were no records of fire drills and the team leader told us fire drills had not taken place.” from the report
  • Medicines management

    serious

    Medicines records and occasional-medicine instructions were not always complete. A medicines fridge had been above the permitted temperature range for five months without the records identifying the problem.

    “Fridge temperature records had not identified an issue with the fridge being above the permitted range for a period of five months.” from the report
  • Incomplete care records

    serious

    Records did not always explain people's health needs, risks, preferences or required support. This could lead to inconsistent care, especially for agency staff who could not access the electronic records.

    “People's care records did not always give full details of their care and support needs to guide staff in how to meet these.” from the report
  • Mental capacity and consent

    serious

    The home did not always assess capacity for specific decisions or record best-interest decisions properly. Sensor mats had not been considered as a restrictive practice.

    “The provider did not always follow the principals of the MCA.” from the report
  • Weak management oversight

    serious

    The provider had not identified several problems found by inspectors. Quality checks, audits and policies were not consistently used to monitor and improve care.

    “The provider's oversight of the service was ineffective.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What has been done to complete regular fire drills and address all recommendations from the fire risk assessment?
  2. 02How are medicines now stored, recorded and checked, including fridge temperatures and 'as and when required' medicines?
  3. 03How do you make sure care plans and risk assessments are updated after falls, incidents or changes in health?
  4. 04How are Mental Capacity Act assessments, best-interest decisions and restrictive practices now recorded and reviewed?
  5. 05What evidence can you show that the warning notices have been met and that the improvements are now embedded?

This was the first comprehensive inspection of the newly registered service and covered all five key questions, the premises, care provided and infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 December 2022 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Springfield Lodge

Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.

  1. December 2022Inadequatecurrent rating
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate

    Read what inspectors found at Springfield Lodge →

  2. April 2021

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 April 2021.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire

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.

Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
Simon W., about Ncebakazi V.
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
Jackie S., about Tracy O.
See live-in carers near LancashireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.