Springfield Residential Home is a care home providing personal care to a maximum of 34 older people who may also have a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 30 people living at the service.

At the last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated good:

The service continued to provide safe care to people. One person commented: “The staff keep us safe.” Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate legal processes. Medicines were safely managed on people’s behalf.

Care files were personalised to reflect people’s personal preferences. Their views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet, which they enjoyed.

Health and social care professionals were regularly involved in people’s care to ensure they received the care and treatment which was right for them.

There were effective staff recruitment and selection processes in place. People received effective care and support from staff who were well trained and competent.

The service was caring and people had built strong relationships with each other and staff. People engaged in a wide variety of activities and spent time in the local community going to specific places of interest.

Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them and encouraged their professional development.

A number of methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received and made continuous improvements in response to their findings.

Our inspections of 9 April 2013 and 19 August 2013 found that the home's storage of controlled drugs did not comply with the legal requirements set out in the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973, amended 2007. This meant that those medicines were more open to mistakes or mishandling than they should be.

This visit on 11 October 2013 was again to check whether the home was complying with the legal requirements set out in the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973, amended 2007.

We found that the controlled drugs cabinet was now secured to the wall in line with the legislation and the home was meeting its legal obligations. This meant that controlled drugs at the home were less open to mistakes or mishandling.

When we did our planned inspection visit on 9 April 2013 we saw that medicines known as controlled drugs were not kept in accordance with the requirements of the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973, amended 2007. Part of the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973, amended 2007 imposes controls on the storage of controlled drugs. Schedule 2 in relation to controlled drugs stipulates that a safe or cabinet shall be rigidly and securely fixed to a wall.

We undertook this unannounced inspection visit only to check that there was safe storage of controlled drugs. We did not therefore ask people about the service they received on this occasion.

We found that the home had purchased a cabinet for the storage of controlled drugs which they kept for people who used the service. However, the cabinet, although within a locked cupboard, was not fixed to the wall in line with the legislation. We found that it could be moved because the fix was not strong. This meant that the home still does not have appropriate arrangements for the safe keeping of controlled drugs.

On the day of our visit we were told that there were 31 people living at Springfield Residential Home. We spoke to eight people living at the home, spent time observing the care people were receiving, spoke to eight members of staff, which included the owners and cook, looked at five people’s care files in detail and looked at the medication administration records for five people.

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and staff acted in accordance with their wishes.

People we spoke with who lived at the home said that their care and welfare needs were being well met. Comments included: “It’s the best home and I love living here”, “My needs are met”, “The home is always warm and comfortable”, “It is wonderful here” and “Staff always ask before helping me.”

We saw the controlled drug box which was kept in one of the medicines cupboards. The controlled drug box was loose within the medicines cupboard. Neither the medicines cupboard nor controlled drugs box were attached securely in line with the requirements of the Misuse of Drugs (Safe Custody) Regulations 1973, amended 2007.

We observed that staff were well organised, motivated and competent in their roles.

People were made aware of the complaints system. This was provided in a format that met their needs. Comments included: “I have no complaints” and “There are no faults.”

This unannounced inspection took place on 19 August 2015. We returned on 24 August 2015 as arranged with the registered manager.

Springfield Residential Home is a care home providing personal care to a maximum of 34 older people who may also have a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 31 people receiving a service.

When we visited there was a registered manager in post. 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.

People felt safe and staff demonstrated a good understanding of what constituted abuse and how to report if concerns were raised. Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate processes.

Care files were personalised to reflect people’s personal preferences. Their views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service. They were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Health and social care professionals were regularly involved in people’s care to ensure they received the right care and treatment.

Staff relationships with people were strong, caring and supportive. Staff were motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and compassionate.

Staffing arrangements were flexible in order to meet people’s individual needs. Staff received a range of training and regular support to keep their skills up to date in order to support people appropriately. Staff spoke positively about communication and how the management team worked well with them, encouraged team working and an open culture.

A number of effective methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received.