We carried out a review of the data available to us about Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities, you can give feedback on this service.
Maple House is a small residential care home that provides care and support for up to five people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection the home was fully occupied.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service
People and their relatives spoke positively about the care and support received. During our inspection we observed that staff interacted well with people and had built good relationship’s and rapport with them.
People and their relatives told us they felt safe. Safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures were in place and staff were aware of the procedures and how to keep people safe. People were protected from identified risks and plans were in place to manage risks safely in the least restrictive way.
There were arrangements in place to manage medicines safely and staff followed appropriate infection control practices to prevent the spread of infections. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. There were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to support people appropriately. Staff were supported through induction, training and supervision.
People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having opportunities for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
Maple House was clean, homely and suitably adapted to meet the needs of the people living there. People had individualised rooms with personal items.
People and their relatives were involved and consulted about their care and support needs. People had access to health and social care professionals as required. People were supported to access community service and to participate in activities of their choosing that met their needs.
Staff worked with people to promote their rights and understood the Equality Act 2010; supporting people appropriately addressing any protected characteristics. There were systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service. The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals and other organisations to ensure appropriate support was provided to individuals.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good (Report was published on 14 December 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Maple House is a small care home that provides care and support for up to five people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection the home was providing support to five people. There was an acting manager in post at the time of our inspection and they were in the process of registering with the CQC to be the registered manager for the service. 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.
At this inspection we found the provider had made the required improvements and was now compliant with the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
Risks to the health and safety of people using the service were assessed and reviewed in line with the provider's policy. Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and there were safeguarding adult’s policies and procedures in place. Accidents and incidents were recorded and acted on appropriately. There were safe staff recruitment practices in place and appropriate numbers of staff to meet people’s needs.
There were processes in place to ensure staff new to the home were inducted into the service appropriately and staff received training, supervision and appraisals. There were systems in place which ensured the service complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). This provides protection for people who do not have capacity to make decisions for themselves. People’s nutritional needs and preferences were met and people had access to health and social care professionals when required.
People were treated with respect and were consulted about their care and support needs. Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy. People’s support needs and risks were identified, assessed and documented within their care plan. People were provided with information on how to make a complaint. There were robust systems and processes in place to monitor and evaluate the service provided. People’s views about the service were sought and considered through service user meetings and satisfaction surveys.
This inspection took place on 10 November 2015 and was unannounced. At our previous inspection in March 2014, we found the provider was meeting the regulations in relation to the outcomes we inspected.
Maple House is a small care home that provides care and support for up to five people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection the home was providing support to five people and had a temporary manager in post.
At this inspection we found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
Medicines were not managed safely and appropriately and medicine audits were not conducted in line with the provider policy to ensure safe practice.
There were some quality assurance and governance systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided, however these were not always operational, used or conducted in line with the provider’s policy to ensure issues were promptly identified and acted upon.
There were safeguarding adult’s policies and procedures in place to protect people from possible harm and incidents and accidents were recorded and acted on appropriately.
Assessments were conducted to assess levels of risk to people’s physical and mental health and care plans contained guidance to provide staff with information that would protect people from harm by minimising assessed risks.
There were safe recruitment practices in place and appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff started work. There were appropriate levels of staff on duty and deployed throughout the home to meet people’s needs.
There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and there were systems in place to monitor the safety of the premises and equipment used within the home.
People were supported by staff that had appropriate skills and knowledge to meet their needs and staff received regular supervision, training and an annual appraisal of their performance.
Staff demonstrated good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) including people’s right to make informed decisions independently but where necessary to act in someone’s best interests.
People were supported to eat and drink suitable healthy foods and sufficient amounts to meet their needs and ensure well-being. People had access to health and social care professionals when required.
Interactions between staff and people using the service were positive and staff had developed good relationships with people. People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends. Care plans documented people’s involvement in the care and where appropriate that relatives were involved in their family members care.
Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs with regards to their disability, race, religion, sexual orientation and gender and supported people appropriately to meet their identified needs and wishes.
People were supported to engage in a range of activities that met their needs and reflected their interests.
People and their relatives told us they knew who to speak with if they had any concerns. There was a complaints policy and procedure in place and complaints were managed appropriately.
The temporary manager was knowledgeable about the requirements of being a registered manager and their responsibilities with regard to the Health and Social Care Act 2014.
The provider took account of the views of people using the service and their relatives through annual residents and relative’s surveys.
We spoke to one person who used the service but another two declined to be interviewed. One person told us "it's a nice place" and "everything's ok". They told us the staff were friendly and they felt safe. The provider carried out a survey in 2011/12 which involved each person who used the service. The results relating to Maple House were overall positive, but where negative comments had been made, such as with the food choice, the service had discussed the issues during a house meeting. This had resulted in some changes such as with the menu.
People's care needs were assessed and each had relevant risk assessments in place, for example when going into the community. Staff were aware of people's support needs and they evidenced when they had delivered the required care for people through daily logs. External professionals were involved in people's care such as a local epilepsy team.
Staff knew about safeguarding adults and the provider had responded appropriately when concerns had been raised. People's money was managed safely. Staff received training although some refresher courses were due to be updated. The provided made changes as a result of quality assurance and its records were appropriate.
People also told us staff involved them when their care plans were reviewed. A key worker system was in place, and people told us they got on well with their key workers and could speak to their key workers if they had any problems.