Springbank House

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

The provider had made improvements to managing risk since the site visit in April 2024. They had addressed areas of concern and had effective systems for monitoring and improving quality. However, the provider had not been fully effective in identifying areas to consistently improve the service. The management team demonstrated a good understanding of the regulatory requirements. There was a positive culture at the service. Staff felt supported by leaders. Staff worked in partnership with outside health and social care professionals to ensure that care met people's needs.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The staff were positive regarding the culture and the vision of the service. A staff member told us, “I love this job. Not long been started but the team, the support, and our residents, well it’s been so good. “Another staff member told us, “I’m in my 3rd month and I’m really enjoying my job. I have just done my medicine competency and that has been challenging for me, more training would be good.” During the assessment we received negative comments regarding the culture and attitude of the management team and their vision. This was currently being investigated by the management team and addressed within team meetings and supervisions.

The provider used individual staff supervision and group team meetings to remind staff about their organisations underlying core values and principles. The area manager told us, “We share the vision with staff during their induction and also at supervisions and staff meetings.” Feedback from most staff was mainly positive and enthusiastic. The service aimed to give people consistently good care and staff worked together to try and achieve this. There have been staff leavers, but they have recruited to the posts and there was minimal agency use at this time.

A staff member told us, “[Managers] are approachable and help when needed out on the floor.” Another staff member told us, “They listen and that helps because sometimes it can be full on and stressful.” The management team was committed to improvement and was open and transparent regarding the improvements made and those that were on going. We were told that the focus of the service was to ensure people were safe and supported in the right way, and that any learning was taken forward positively.

There is currently no registered manager in post. The post has been vacant for eight months. The provider was actively seeking to recruit, in the meantime the area manager was working full time in the service to provide consistent leadership to the team and lead the improvement plan. There were systems and processes in place to support staff development and progression within their roles. Staff told us how they were supported to gain qualifications and extend their role, to become team leaders. Senior care staff were supported to be become medicine givers for which they received support and training. Regular supervisions, spot checks, competencies and values-based supervisions now took place. The provider supported staff to attend external training, online training and meet with other staff within the organisation to share learning and reflect on practices.

Staff told us that felt able to raise concerns. A staff member told us, “I would bring my concerns to [the area manager and deputy manager].” The management team understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour. The Duty of Candour is to be open and honest when untoward events occur.

Leaders were open and transparent. They admitted when things went wrong and demonstrated how they had used these to make improvements. They were responsive to expert guidance from health professionals. The provider had up-to-date whistleblowing policies and procedures which were in line with current guidance. Staff told us were supported and enabled to voice their views and concerns. They were aware of the whistle blowing policy but felt that they could raise them and be listened to. The area manager felt that this confirmed staff had a safe place to raise their concerns, and had introduced a ‘you said, we did’ board, which would inform staff and people of actions taken from feedback and complaints. People confirmed they knew how to complain, and a copy of the complaints policy was available in the home and on the service website. A record of complaints was held in the service. These included the information on the complaint and how this was responded to. We saw complaints had been responded to and actions taken, as necessary.

Staff said they felt they were respected as individuals and that they could approach them if home circumstances changed, and they need to look at their shift times being arranged to fit in with family commitments. A staff member told us, “We get training in equality and diversity, it’s like a family here the support is very good.”

There was an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policy and an Equal Opportunities policy. Staff undertook training in equality and diversity. There were robust measures in place to monitor, maintain and promote good mental well-being across the staff group. These included 1-1 supervisions, de-brief sessions following an incident, group discussions and an open-door policy.

The management team demonstrated a good understanding of the regulatory requirements. They told us they analysed and reviewed audits each month and action was taken to address shortfalls.

Quality assurance systems were in place but had not been fully effective in identifying areas to consistently improve the service. For example, the management of medicines needed immediate improvements to ensure that people received their medicines safely. Whilst weekly audits identified issues these were not actioned, and the monthly medicine audit did not reflect these issues. Immediate changes were made and advice and support sought from the Medicines Optimisation in Care Homes (MOCH) programme. The management team had worked hard since the last assessment to ensure there was oversight and effective governance at the service. There were improved systems and processes to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided. This included accidents, incidents, complaints, medication records and staff documentation. Throughout this assessment process the management team continued to review areas identified as needing to improve and we received improved support plans.

People told us appropriate health and social care professionals were contacted appropriately when required. A person told us, “When I recently had a bad crisis, they contacted my doctors to review my medicine, and informed my mental health worker." Another staff member told us, “They keep an eye on my appointments, so I don’t miss any of them.”

Staff told us how they would contact relevant external professionals to meet people’s needs.

There was only one comment received. A health and social care professional told us, “Staff are encouraging people to go out more and socialise which has helped my client.”

The staff team were proactive in building relationships with other organisations and into the local community to improve outcomes for people. They now had close links with the local authority and utilised any additional training opportunities when they were offered. Staff and leaders work in partnership with key organisations to support care provision, service development and joined-up care. Staff and leaders engaged with people, communities, and partners to share learning with each other that resulted in continuous improvements to the service. They use these networks to identify new or innovative ideas that can lead to better outcomes for people. Staff worked with various external agencies including, GPs, community nursing teams, social workers, and Local Authorities. Relevant information was shared appropriately.

Discussions with the management team and staff demonstrated they recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement to ensure they people received care and support that was safe and effective. A staff member told us, “We are continuously learning, we welcome feedback because we learn from it”

Safeguarding concerns, complaints, accidents, incidents and near misses were reviewed and analysed. Emerging themes were identified, and action taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. People, families, staff, visiting health professionals were given opportunities to feedback their views about the service and quality of the care they received. Staff supported people to give feedback and opportunities which they had to drive improvements and encourage learning from any incidents which occurred. The management team had oversight of accidents and incidents. Trends and patterns were looked for, if identified were addressed. For example, searching with permission people’s rooms for objects that may be used to self-harm and illegal substances. We saw example of lessons learnt following incidents which occurred within the service. Reflective crisis meetings were held with staff to give opportunities to discuss development points to encourage improvement in practice. Learning was, where appropriate, also shared across the providers other services. The area manager encouraged staff to speak up about positive ideas.