Archived: The Maples

Updated 25 February 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 21 and 22 January 2016 and was unannounced. It was carried out by one inspector.

People had communication difficulties associated with their learning difficulty. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with people’s relatives and staff to help form our judgements.

We spoke with one person who lived at the home and with five relatives. We spoke with five care staff and the registered manager. We observed care and support in communal areas and looked at three people’s care records. We also looked at records that related to how the home was managed, such as quality assurance audits.

Before our inspection we reviewed all of the information we held about the home. We also reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR) and previous inspection reports. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make.

Updated 25 February 2016

The Maples is a care home for up to six people with learning and physical disabilities. People require 24 hour staff support in the home and support to go out. The home is a detached bungalow set in its own grounds, close to the town centre.

A registered manager was responsible for the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This inspection took place on 21 and 22 January 2016 and was unannounced. It was carried out by one inspector.

People had communication difficulties associated with their learning difficulty. One person was able to share their views with us. We therefore used our observations of care and our discussions with people’s relatives and staff to help form our judgements.

The home was a safe place for people. Staff understood people’s needs and provided the care and support they needed. One relative said “The care is super.”

People were supported to make as many choices about their own lives as they could. People used community facilities and were encouraged to be as independent as they could be. People appeared happy with the care they received and interacted well with staff.

Staffing levels were good and people also received good support from health and social care professionals. Staff were skilled at communicating with people, especially if people were unable to communicate verbally.

Staff had built close, trusting relationships with people over time. One relative said “The staff have really gotten to know [their family member] well. This is really important as you really need to understand her.”

People, and those close to them, were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support. There was a very close relationship and good communication with people’s relatives. Relatives felt their views were listened to and acted on.

Communication and morale throughout the staff team was good. Staff were well supported and well trained. All staff spoken with said the support they received was very good. Staff spoke highly of the care they were able to provide to people. One staff member said “I think the support we provide is really good. What always strikes me is how nice the atmosphere is here and all the staff really do care. I think people here pick up on that.”

There was a management structure in the home which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability. The management team strived to provide the best level of care to people and improve the service where possible. The aims of the service were well defined and adopted by the staff team. One relative said “It’s a nice relaxed home; I can’t fault it at all.”

There were effective quality assurance processes in place to monitor care and safety and plan ongoing improvements. There were systems in place to share information and seek people’s views about the running of the home.