Spring Lake

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 rating has improved from requires improvement to good during this assessment. Governance systems were in place to help monitor aspects of the service so that the quality of care provided could be continuously assessed and monitored. The manager promoted a culture which focused on people’s individual needs. Management had oversight of the service and promoted an open culture. Staff spoke positively about the manager and told us they listened, were approachable and caring. Management sought feedback from people and family members and made improvements where necessary.

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.

Staff spoke positively about working at the home. They understood the values of the organisation and had sufficient information about these values. The manager told us they were passionate about assessing people appropriately and allocating appropriate timings so that so that the care met people’s individual needs.

The culture at the service reflected the visions and values of the organisation and best practice. Staff provided personalised care which met people's individual needs.

Staff spoke positively about the manager and said they felt well supported. A member of staff told us, “I am 100% supported by the manager. Since the new manager started, a lot of good changes have been implemented.” Staff told us the manager was approachable and took a genuine interest in what people, family members and staff had to say. The manager emphasised their commitment to making improvements and providing high quality care which supported people to live fulfilling lives.

Regular meetings between management and staff provided them with an opportunity to discuss the running of the home and people's individual support needs. The service operated in an open and transparent way. There was an open-door policy where the manager was available for people, family members and staff when they were needed. There were effective systems in place to support this.

Staff told us they knew how to speak up if they had concerns or something went wrong. They felt the manager and the organisation supported them and listened to them. A member of staff told us, “There is openness. I wouldn’t hesitate to raise my concerns. We are encouraged to speak up.”

The manager operated an open-door policy and welcomed feedback from staff. Staff were able to discuss issues at one to one meetings and team meetings. There were procedures for responding to concerns and to support staff to feel confident speaking up. Systems were in place for staff to raise anonymous concerns.

Staff told us they felt well treated working at the home and their diversity needs were met. A member of staff told us, “There is flexibility which helps me.” Staff were supported with flexible working conditions, felt discrimination was challenged and had opportunities to celebrate their diversity. They were supported to celebrate festivals and special events which were important to them.

The provider had systems to help ensure staff were treated well and make sure they had opportunities. They had policies and procedures for workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. These were implemented through recruitment practices, training, and support for staff.

The manager was able to demonstrate how they had made improvements to systems in the home since the last inspection. The manager had reviewed health and safety in the home, reviewed people’s capacity and restrictions placed on them and computerised care and record keeping systems. A management structure was in place. Staff had clear roles and responsibilities and were well informed of their roles and reporting arrangements. Staff spoke positively about the management of the service. The manager had an understanding of people’s individual needs and maintained oversight of the quality of the service to help ensure the service provided good quality care and support.

Appropriate systems were in place to help promote good governance. The provider's policies and procedures reflected legislation and good practice guidance. Audits and checks were carried out to monitor the running and efficiency of the service. The aim of these were to identify deficiencies and help promote and drive improvement. Audits and checks were carried out by the manager and included checks on MARs, daily log notes and care plans. There were systems to ensure all staff were accountable and shared information with each other and managers.

People’s family members told us the home worked in partnership with healthcare professionals who supported them. Family members we spoke with were confident the manager and staff would make referrals to other agencies if needed.

Staff and management told us they worked well with the local authorities and health care professionals. Records showed people had been supported by local teams and different community groups where necessary. Management attended meetings to help connect with other professionals, gather information and share feedback.

The provider was open to feedback and actioned input from other professionals. Following a visit from a care professional, the manager had implemented an action plan to address areas that had been identified as requiring improvement.

Effective systems were in place to help encourage good working relationships with community health care teams and the local authorities. These relationships helped to support people to receive joined up care.

The manager explained that since they had started working at the home, they had made improvements to the service based on their own quality monitoring, information from other parties and applying best practice. The manager told us they were committed to the continuous improvement of the home and emphasised the importance of promoting a culture of learning and development within the home. The manager explained that when they first started managing the home, they did not make immediate changes. Instead, they observed and learnt the processes and routines in the home. The manager then spoke with staff and involved them in the changes. The manager told us, “I do not change things without consultation with staff. I empower staff to take control and make changes.”

Management undertook a range of audits to monitor the quality of care and support provided at the home. Areas audited included health and safety, care records and medicines management. Processes enabled the service to use information from audits, feedback and care plan reviews to make positive changes and improvements to the running of the home. The manager carried out spot checks to observe staff, regular staff supervision and gathered feedback from people’s family members and care professionals through telephone calls, visits and reviews.