Maple House

Updated 18 January 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 14 and 15 November 2017. The first day of the inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors and an expert by experience and was unannounced. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The second day was carried out by one adult social care inspector and was announced.

At the last inspection in August 2015 we identified that recruitment files did not always show evidence of applicants’ full employment history, or document that character references had been sought from all of their relevant previous employment positions in health and social care.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the information in the PIR and also looked at other information we held about the service before the inspection visit.

During this inspection we spoke with 10 people living at the home, five members of staff and four visiting relatives. We also spoke with the manager the regional manager. We spent time observing care practices in communal areas of the home.

We looked at a number of records relating to individual care and the running of the home. These included five care and support plans, three staff personnel files, training and supervision records and minutes of meetings held at the home.

Updated 18 January 2018

Maple House provides residential accommodation and nursing care for up to 51 older people, including people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection 49 people were living in the home.

This inspection took place on 14 and 15 November 2017, and was unannounced.

At the last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Although the service was rated Good at the last inspection the Safe domain was rated Requires Improvement as we found recruitment processes did not always evidence that people had been protected from the risks of unsuitable staff. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and people were protected from harm by robust recruitment processes.

Why the service is rated Good

There was a registered manager in post. However the registered manager had been promoted to regional manager and the new manager was in the process of submitting their application to be registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with CQC 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were processes and practices in place to keep people safe. People told us they felt safe living in Maple House and with the staff who supported them.

People received effective care and support because staff understood their personal needs and abilities. Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. The provider had a programme of training which ensured staff had up to date guidance and information. People were always consulted fully before any care and support commenced.

People said they received support from staff who were always “polite and kind.” One person said, “They are all very nice here; I wouldn’t have it any other way.” A visiting relative said, “I have never heard a cross word they are all very nice and kind.”

There was a full programme of activities for people to take part in and the service had built up close relationships with the local community and school.

Staff were supported to develop their skills through training, staff meetings and one to one conversations. One staff member said, “The training is excellent, couldn’t ask for more. If we see something we would like training in we only have to mention it and the manager will source it for us.”

People and staff were supported by a manager who was approachable and listened to any suggestions they had for continued development of the service provided.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, ensure staff kept up to date with good practice and to seek people’s views.