You are here

Archived: The MaltHouse Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 16 February 2016

This inspection took place on 13 January 2016. It was carried out by one inspector.

The Malthouse provided residential care for up to 33 older people. There were 29 people living in the home at the time of our visit, some of whom were living with dementia.

There was a registered manager who had been in post for four years. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were sufficient trained and competent staff to meet people’s needs. The home was fully staffed and there was a waiting list of potential staff who had expressed an interest in working in there. Staff were keen and motivated and told us they enjoyed their job.

People felt well cared for and the staff worked well as a team. Staff told us they were able to take time with people and they were taught they were a 24 hour service and there was no need to rush. People told us they were happy with the care they received and they were positive about staff. We saw staff being kind and respectful to people. People and their families told us they felt involved in decisions about their care. People had their privacy and dignity respected.

There were activity organisers seven days a week who were supported by volunteer staff. There was a varied programme of activities which included trips out, social events, crafts and quizzes as well as exercise.

People told us they were safe living in the home and had confidence in the staff. They told us they were enjoyed the food and were offered a choice at mealtimes, relatives were encouraged to join them.

Peoples had personalised care plans which were informative and indicated peoples likes, dislikes and preferences. People were provided with choices about all aspects of care and support they received. Staff were able to talk with us about people and demonstrated to us they knew people as individuals.

There was a clear management structure. The registered manager was supported by a deputy manager who staff told us were supportive and approachable. There were systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service

Staff told us they had access to further training .The home was accredited with the Gold Standard Framework training which a nationally recognised training to ensure people received excellent end of life care. The home had good links with the GP surgery and staff attended their monthly meetings.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure there was good communication with people, their families and staff.

Inspection areas



Updated 16 February 2016

There were sufficient suitably experienced and competent staff.

Medicines were administered and stored correctly.

People had a full assessment which identified any specific risks. There was a care plan which provided guidance how to minimise the risk.

People were at reduced risk from harm and abuse. Staff had received training and were able to tell us how they would recognise abuse and how they would report it.



Updated 16 February 2016

People were cared for by appropriately trained staff. Staff were encouraged to undertake further learning.

People had sufficient food and drink. They were provided with choices.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how this applied to their daily work.

People had access to healthcare from a range of healthcare professionals.



Updated 16 February 2016

People were cared for by staff who treated them with kindness and respect.

People had their privacy and dignity maintained.

People were involved in decisions about their care.

The home was accredited with Gold Service Framework at a commend status for end of life care.



Updated 16 February 2016

People had opportunity to engage in a range of social and leisure activities over seven days a week.

People had personalised plans which took into account their likes, dislikes and preferences.

People told us they knew how to raise concerns. There was a complaints policy and complaints were investigated by a member of the management team.



Updated 16 February 2016

The service was well led. People and staff told us the registered manager was accessible and available.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and to ensure improvements were on-going.