Maple House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked at all quality statements for Caring at this assessment. The service was not always caring, however there was some improvement since the last inspection. Staff reported an improved culture and morale. This required further monitoring to ensure it was consistent for all staff members. Staff on site were observed to have positive interactions with people and spoke about them in a kind and respectful way. People’s individual needs and preferences were well understood by the staff we spoke with during the assessment. However, records showed use of language by some staff reflected a lack of understanding about managing distress and anxiety, and was not consistently positive, empathetic and respectful. This was a continued concern from our last inspection, which the provider was continuing to work on. People’s relatives told us they would like more opportunity for people to access leisure activities in the community. Staff had improved guidance to respond to people’s immediate care needs, to reduce the risk of avoidable distress, pain, or discomfort.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff we spoke with on-site were respectful, knowledgeable and kind when talking about the people they supported. However, whilst there had been improvements to records since the last inspection, there were still some concerns relating to negative language used by some staff. For example, we saw some incident records described a person as ‘very rude ignoring staff’ and referred to staff having to ‘deal with behaviour.’ The registered manager told us they would take action to ensure consistency in staff practice, including additional training and supervision where required.

We provided feedback to the registered manager about some continued negative language used in care records, and discussed how they could consider including review of language in newly implemented systems for overseeing incidents and daily care notes. The registered manager was open to this and told us they would take action to ensure further improvements were made in this area.

We received positive feedback from the local authority to show the provider was transitioning towards an improved service.

We observed staff treated people with respect, compassion and warmth when spending time with people at Maple Houe. However, information was not always stored securely to maintain people’s privacy and confidentiality, due to the office set up which included a desk and notice board in a shared living area. We raised this with the registered manager to follow up.

People’s individual needs and preferences were mostly understood and reflected in their care, treatment, and support. A relative told us, “I feel [person] is treated as an individual because they are one. [Person] comes home on a regular basis, they are always happy to return to the home, they are happy to go back.”

Staff understood and used people’s preferred methods of communication. A staff member told us, “[Person] likes hand motions. I’ll go with [person], showing [them], for example putting socks on, showing them. We use the activity board, which shows ‘now’ and ‘next’.”

We observed staff treated people as individuals and knew their interests and hobbies. People also had a detailed lifestyle care plan which set out this information in a person-centred way, with photographs and information.

Whilst processes were in place to explore and take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, and unique backgrounds, some records did not fully reflect this. The provider was continuing to work on reviewing records and care plans at the time of assessment.

People’s relatives told us they would like more staff who could drive available on shifts, to increase the amount and variety of community access and activities for people living at Maple House. This would help to meet people’s choices and preferences. A relative said, “I do think it is person-centred, just more activities [required], the lack of car drivers makes it more difficult.”

Staff we spoke with were committed to supporting people’s independence. This still needed to be consistently applied in practice by all of the staff team.

We observed people were offered choice by staff during our site visits. For example, a staff member asked people if they would like to change their clothing due to the weather brightening up that day, and offered people sun cream.

The provider was continuing to work with people and their relatives to support independence and increase access to a range of leisure activities in line with their preferences and choices. Care plans clearly set out how people would like to be supported to maintain their independence.

Improvements had been made to the staff approach to recognising and de-escalating signs of anxiety or distress. This required further monitoring to ensure consistency.

Staff continued to embed learning about helping people manage distressed reactions. A staff member told us, “I do find that the way you care does differ when you have the knowledge, definitely.”

Staff were available to anticipate preventable discomfort, concern or distress. There were homely remedies on hand such as painkillers and ‘as needed’ (PRN) medication to support with people’s anxiety or pain relief if required.

Staff told us they felt well supported, and able to speak up. We received feedback there was a more positive atmosphere, and more focus on staff wellbeing. A staff member said, “We are good carers. We have a staff member of the month.” And, “We are told at the end of each staff meeting [who is staff member of the month]. It’s good.”

De-briefs and risk assessments had been introduced to support staff in case of incidents or accidents in the workplace. The provider had further areas to develop within the service, to ensure all staff were enabled and empowered to consistently provide care meeting the expected quality standards.