You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 March 2017

This inspection took place on 18 January 2017 and was unannounced. The previous inspection was carried out in May 2013 and no concerns were identified.

Maylands is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 18 people who have a learning disability and who need support with their personal care. Maylands is in a residential area of Whitstable, within accessible distance of local amenities. Accommodation is provided over two levels, there were 17 people living at the service at the time of inspection and each had their own ensuite bedroom, all of which were personalised to suit each individuals tastes.

The service had a registered manager, who was present throughout the inspection. 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.

We received wholly positive feedback about Maylands from people, relatives and professionals. We heard about exceptional standards of care and support which improved the quality of people's lives and gave their families peace of mind. We observed warm, caring attitudes from staff and a real drive to provide the best possible service for people.

The registered manager, a deputy manager and senior staff, provided leadership to the staff and led by example. Staff were motivated and felt supported by the registered manager and management team. The staff team were committed to the mission of the organisation, ‘to offer people a home for life.’ Staff treated people as individuals and each person received person centred support. Staff told us the registered manager was very approachable and they were confident and were extremely positive about their style of management.

A system to recruit new staff was in place. This was to make sure that the staff employed to support people were fit to do so. There were plenty of staff on duty to make sure people were safe and people's needs were met promptly and effectively by staff who knew people and their preferences very well. Staff had completed induction training when they first started to work at the service. Staff were supported during their induction, monitored and assessed to check that they had attained the right skills and knowledge to be able to care for, support and meet people’s needs. The registered manager carried out routine checks of staff knowledge and capability.

There were staff meetings, so staff could discuss any issues and share new ideas with their colleagues, to improve people’s care and support.

People were kept safe because staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. Staff had received safeguarding training; they knew the signs of abuse and were confident about how to raise a concern. Staff knew about the whistle blowing policy and were confident they could raise any concerns with the provider or outside agencies if needed.

Medicines were stored and administered safely. People were supported in a safe environment and possible risks to people had been identified and were managed to keep people as safe as possible whilst enabling people to live as independent a life as possible. People's health was carefully monitored and professional advice sought quickly and efficiently as needed. Staff worked collaboratively with health professionals, especially from the local community teams, forming excellent working relationships which had led to good outcomes for people.

Equipment and premises received regular checks and servicing in order to ensure it was safe. The registered manager monitored incidents and accidents to make sure the care provided was safe. Emergency plans were in place so if an emergency happened, like a fire, the staff knew what to do.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of

Inspection areas



Updated 31 March 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm and abuse. Assessments had been made to minimise personal and environmental risks to people.

People received their medicines when they needed them and in a way that was safe. They were stored safely.

There was staff on duty to meet peoples� needs. Appropriate checks were made when employing new staff.



Updated 31 March 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received training, supervision and support to have the skills and knowledge they needed to be effective in their roles.

Staff followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff understood the importance of gaining consent and giving people choice.

People�s health was monitored and staff ensured people had access to external healthcare professionals when they needed it. People were provided with a range of nutritious foods and drinks.



Updated 31 March 2017

The service was exceptionally caring.

Staff knew people well, were kind, caring and compassionate and had developed positive relationships with people and their family members.

Staff took the time needed to communicate with people and included people in conversations. Staff spoke with people in a caring, dignified and compassionate way. People were treated with kindness, respect and dignity.

Staff actively encouraged and supported people to maintain relations with their families.



Updated 31 March 2017

The service was extremely responsive.

People�s care and support was planned in line with their individual care and support needs. The service was flexible and responsive to people�s changing needs and wishes.

Staff had an excellent understanding of people�s needs and preferences. People were supported to take part in full and varied activities and social events that were individualised and meaningful to them.

People and relatives knew how to raise a concern or complaint and felt listened to.



Updated 31 March 2017

The service was well-led.

People and staff were positive about the leadership at the service. Staff told us that they felt supported by the registered manager and provider.

Positive links with the community had benefited people.

Quality assurance surveys, regular audits and checks were undertaken at the service to make sure it was safe and running effectively.

Records were accurate, up to date and were stored securely.