Spring Lake

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

The rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. People received a personalised service that met their individual abilities and needs. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and wishes. There were systems in place to monitor aspects of the service and the quality of care provided. People were supported to take part in community events. People’s equality and diversity needs were respected and met.

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.

People’s needs were met in a personalised way. Family members told us they were involved in care planning and reviews of their care. They also said that care staff understood people’s needs and how to meet them. Family members said the provider was responsive and adapted care plans when needed.

Staff knew the people they were caring for and treated them as individuals. Staff were able to explain what people’s likes and preferences were and how best to meet them. Staff told us they would check care plans for information on meeting people’s needs. The manager explained that care was delivered to people in a person-centred way. Staff explained that people had different communication needs and they tailored communication methods to each individual. A care staff said, “People in the home are non verbal. We use other means to communicate with them; Makaton, signs, gestures and body language.”

We observed people received person centered care. Staff communicated with people individually based on their needs and preferences.

Family members we spoke with were confident that management and staff regularly engaged with other health and social care providers.

Staff and the manager told us they regularly engaged with other health providers and the local authority. The manager was able to show evidence that they understood how to navigate the local health care systems. This helped to provide coordinated care. Staff had made referrals to health care teams such as the occupational therapist, district nurse or the dietician teams to support people with their health needs.

Records we reviewed showed the provider had a good working relationship with the local authority and health care professionals. There were no concerns raised with us during our assessment with regards to communication between parties.

We saw documented evidence of the manager and staff referring people to various health care teams when people’s needs changed. This meant people could be confident support would be sought from the appropriate health care professional, who had the expertise and skills to support them to meet their care needs, where this was required. The provider's processes included liaising with other professionals and providing continuity of care.

Family members told us they had the information they needed. They knew who the manager was, who to contact if needed and they were provided with information about people’s care and support. A family member told us, “They keep me informed of what is happening. Communication is good.”

The manager explained that because of people’s needs, it was more appropriate for people to have individual meetings with their allocated key worker. This enabled people to communicate in their preferred way with staff. The manager also advised that they held regular meetings with family members where they were able to review people’s care and provide necessary information.

People’s preferred communication methods were clearly recorded in their care plans. This information was personalised. Care records were also presented in an easy read format for people if needed. Systems were in place to hold confidential information and the provider had systems to ensure compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (UK GDPR). Service records were kept locked away or password protected on electronic devices. This helped to ensure people’s private and sensitive information was only shared with authorised persons.

Family members we spoke with told us people’s communication needs were met and that the staff understood them. Family members told us staff tried to find ways to communicate positively with people who did not use words to communicate. They told us they were asked for their opinions about care. A family member tod us, “I am kept informed of developments. They also ask me for my feedback. I can share my feedback without hesitation.”

Staff and the manager told us they communicated with people and spoke with family members regularly to obtain feedback. We saw evidence of communication between family members and staff. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and took appropriate action to help ensure people received effective care and support. Staff told us they had support and training to help enhance communication with people. The manager explained that they used ‘object of reference’ as a form of communication with some people. Object of reference are objects used to represent a person, activity or event. This is used to help people understand what is happening in their environment and used to help people make choices. The manager gave us an example how a person in the home would rub their chest to indicate that they wanted a shower.

Each person had a communication profile. This provided information about people’s individual needs and included information about how the person communicates and details of how to communicate with them. People’s care records included details of what interactions indicated the person was communicating a positive and negative emotion. The information was clear and detailed and helped staff understand this person.

People’s records showed there was regular and consistent input from health care professionals. Family members told us staff could access health care support for people when needed.

Staff and the manager were able to describe how they supported people with reasonable adjustments. For example, a referral was made to the occupational therapist service.

Feedback from external care professionals was mostly positive about the home. A care professional said, “[The home] has been brilliant at meeting my resident’s needs and ensuring [they] remain well and safe.”

There was a system in place to support people to access health care providers. The manager shared some examples of how people had accessed health care professionals which helped people to meet their needs.

Family members spoke positively about the home and said people’s needs were being met. Feedback indicated that communication between the manager, staff and family members was positive. The manger encouraged feedback and told family members to openly raise issues if needed. People's equality needs were met. People were supported to attend places of worship. People's cultural and religious needs were met.

Staff and the manager told us they continuously looked at ways to help meet people's diversity and cultural needs including providing a range of culturally appropriate food. Staff were complimentary about working at the home and said they felt valued. They told us the home was a good place to work. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and the importance of treating people equally regardless of their abilities, their background or their lifestyle. Staff and the manager told us they respected people as individuals and would not discriminate against people for any reason. Staff told us it was important to be aware of people’s diverse needs. For example, staff were able to explain how important it was for people to follow their beliefs and culture. Staff would ask people how they wanted to be supported. For example, staff would ask whether people wanted to have certain meals or observe religious festivals. This meant people could be confident staff listened and valued their individuality and preferences.

Procedures regarding equality and diversity were in place. Staff had completed training to understand about how to meet people's diverse needs. The care planning documents for people emphasised the importance of supporting people with religious and cultural needs. Management carried out audits and checks which monitored the quality of the service provided. If shortfalls were identified, management took appropriate action. Management also sought feedback from people and family members. These were gained through the use of satisfaction surveys. Where people had any cultural or religious needs, these were clearly recorded to ensure staff were aware of them and could help support people to meet these needs.

Care plans included information about people’s end of life wishes and preferences where their family members had provided these.

The manager told us that at the time of the inspection no one was being supported at the end of their life or in receipt of palliative care. The manager explained that they had attempted to discuss end of life with people’s family members and this was a sensitive discussion. They explained that where family members had been comfortable discussing this, there was an appropriate care plan in place.

An appropriate end of life policy was in place.