You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

About the service

The Maples is a residential care home that was providing care to 14 people living with learning disabilities at the time of the inspection. The service provides accommodation and support in three separate bungalows on one site for up to 15 people who have autism and accompanying learning disabilities.

We inspected this service within the principles of Registering the Right Support (RRS) and other best practice guidance. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Not all people living at The Maples were able to verbally give us their views. Therefore, we observed their care and support throughout the inspection to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Outcomes for people did not fully reflect the principles and values of RRS for the following reasons. There was limited information seen that staff were consistently providing support and care that met people’s needs in line with strategies to reduce behaviour that challenged. People's care plans described what interests and activities may help in reducing behaviour that challenged. However, people’s daily records showed limited evidence of these taking place. RRS principles state that social isolation should be reduced by accessing the wider community and other relevant resources.

We have made a recommendation that the provider refer to best practice guidance, on delivering care and support to meet people’s assessed needs to achieve meaningful outcomes.

People told us they took part in activities they enjoyed and were supported to follow their interests. People, and where applicable their relatives, were provided with opportunities by management to review their support needs on a regular basis. Accessible information was provided to help people make an informed choice. Complaints were handled and responded to in line with the provider's complaints policy.

People were supported by staff that knew them well and were kind and caring. There was a calm, friendly and warm approach by staff when supporting people. People's views were requested and acted on and staff communicated effectively with people. Staff treated people with respect and dignity. People's records were handled appropriately and in line with data protection legislation.

People were protected from the risk of avoidable harm and abuse and staff understood how to act on any concerns. There were sufficient numbers of staff in place and they understood how to provide people with safe care and support. People's medicines were managed safely and effectively. Accidents and incidents were investigated. This included clear processes for investigation and support for staff to learn from mistakes.

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. Staff were well trained and received regular supervision to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. People were supported effectively to eat and drink healthily and had access to support from external health and social care agencies.

There was a committed management team in place and there were effective systems to monitor and improve the quality of the service. The service had identified areas of improvement and produced an action plan to ensure these actions were completed. The provider and managers undertook regulation quality assurance checks to maintain an overview of the service. People, relatives and staff told us they liked the management team and felt supported. The provider and managers encouraged people, relatives and external stakeholders to give their views about

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 September 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.