Springfield Care Home Limited

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 6 August 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Springfield care home is a care home for up to 45 people and at the time of this assessment there was 38 people living at the service. The service supports older people and people living with dementia.

We carried out this assessment on 15 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

People were protected from avoidable harm because staff understood safeguarding procedures and knew how to recognise and report concerns. Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing were appropriately assessed and managed. However, window safety checks were not in line with current safety standards and window restrictors needed to be updated to be tamper proof. This was rectified by the provider immediately after our assessment.

Safe recruitment practices were followed, medicines were managed safely, and there were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff were trained in DoLs and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

People's needs were assessed and care was delivered in line with current best practice and guidance. Staff received appropriate training, supervision and support to carry out their roles effectively. People were supported to maintain good health and wellbeing and had access to healthcare services when required.

Staff consistently demonstrated kindness, compassion and respect. People told inspectors they were treated with dignity and their privacy was maintained. Positive relationships had been developed between staff and the people they supported, enabling care to be delivered in a person-centred manner that promoted independence and wellbeing.

Care and support met people's individual needs, preferences and wishes. People's views were sought and acted upon, and care plans reflected their personal circumstances and goals. People felt confident they would be listened to if they raised issues.

The service benefited from strong leadership and a positive culture that placed people at the centre of care delivery. Governance systems were effective in monitoring quality, safety and performance. Staff felt supported by management and worked collaboratively to continuously improve the service. Feedback from people, relatives and staff was actively sought and used to drive improvements.