Maple Lodge

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

We assessed 7 quality statements under the well-led key question, identifying both areas of good practice and areas of improvement. The overall rating for this key question is good. While audits and checks were in place, they did not identify all failings found during our assessment, including issues with medicines management, cleanliness of kitchen and equipment. The management team immediately took actions to address these concerns. People, relatives and staff described the registered manager as approachable and accessible to discuss queries or concerns. The provider worked with other agencies, this included regular meetings to monitor the health of people and ensure people’s care needs were met. We received some feedback about previous issues with consistency and communication. However, the current registered manager was making the necessary improvements in those areas. Relatives and staff told us there were regular opportunities to provide feedback on the service and the management.

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 described a positive culture and felt valued and listened to by the management team. Staff told us, “It is lovely. I would not want to work anywhere else” and “[Person] is fair and approachable and will take on board suggestions the staff team makes.”

The service user guide set out the provider values. The statement of purpose sets out the ethos of the organisation. Provider initiatives were in place to recognise staff members who had been considered do have gone ‘over and above’ their normal duties and demonstrated the ethos and values of the company.

Staff described the registered manager as approachable. We were told, “[Person] is relatively new to the post, however, so far, has been fair and approachable to the staff team.”

Staff had a number of ways they could engage with the leadership of the home. Regular team meetings were held, this gave staff the opportunity to share their views as a group and seek support from the management team.

Staff told us they were aware of the provider’s whistle blowing policy and felt confident they could speak up. We were told, “I’m confident management would take my concerns seriously and take the most appropriate action.”

The provider had policies and procedures in place which guided staff through how they could speak up about any concerns they had about people’s care. This included raising concerns externally to other agencies, if they felt they were not being listened to.

The registered manager told us they valued diversity and provided us with examples of how they ensured protected characteristics were considered for staff.

Policies and procedures were in place to ensure people were treated fairly and equitably. This included when staff had protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. Training was available to staff to complete.

The registered manager described auditing systems and meetings that took place to monitor and gain assurance about the quality of the service. This included regular meetings with external professionals, which was confirmed in feedback from staff.

Systems and processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service. There were several audits and regular checks undertaken to maintain oversight. Generally, we found the systems in place to be effective, some had not identified all the shortfalls we identified. However, when we raised any shortfalls with the registered manager, they were immediately addressed, and systems were put in place to ensure the improvements were maintained.

Relatives told us the provider worked well with them and external professionals to deliver co-ordinated care to people.

Feedback from staff confirmed collaboration with people, relatives and external professionals to provide coordinated care to people.

Staff at Maple Lodge had worked with the local authority partners to make improvements following a period of inconsistency. They confirmed improvements were implemented; the registered manager was proactive in embedding this.

Care records demonstrated there were arrangements in place for effective multi agency working for people. Meetings were held with other professionals and agencies to discuss people’s care and ensure their needs were met.

The registered manager told us they focused on learning and sharing best practice. This included regular meetings with staff to focus on improvements and shared learning.

The provider had processes in place to help them to learn and improve. For example, a new electronic sign in system enabled people to leave feedback. This system enabled the management team to address any concerns straightaway. The provider was also able to demonstrate how feedback was used to drive improvements at Maple Lodge, with a focus on improving people's quality of life.