Maple View

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The provider used an electronic support planning system, which included information to reflect their preferences, interests and support needs. Support plans reflected people’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs. They evidenced that people had been involved in sharing information on their preferences, likes, dislikes and how they wished to receive care. Support plans were regularly reviewed to ensure staff could respond to any changes to people’s needs. We reviewed care logs and found people were supported in the way they wanted. One support plan recorded, “[Person] makes clear if they want to be left alone, [they] go to their bedroom and shut the door.”

People were supported and encouraged to engage in hobbies and interests that were meaningful to them.

Each person had an assigned key worker who conducted monthly reviews. These meetings provided an opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of current support and to identify any desired changes.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider worked collaboratively with health and social care professionals to mitigate risks to people. Medical and other health-related appointments were consistently maintained, and records were kept of any concerns arising. A professional told us, “I didn’t have any concerns regarding numbers of staff and when I visited, the service user was always supported by staff they knew.”

Staff received training to support the diverse needs of individuals using the service. This included training in equality and diversity, as well as learning disability and autism, enabling staff to better understand and respond to people’s specific needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider’s accessible information policy and procedure was issued to staff to promote open and transparent communication within the service. People had detailed communication plans in place. Staff we spoke with understood people’s needs and were able to communicate effectively with them. A staff member told us, “I communicate by using speech, British sign language [BSL], picture exchange communication [PEC] cards and writing, depending on who I am communicating with.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People were asked for feedback through supervisions and through their 1:1 support with staff. Information on how to complain was displayed in the service in an easy read format. This meant people had access to information about how to make a complaint and provide feedback in a range of accessible ways.

A relative told us, “I’ve had more communication with a new manager than with the previous one. [New manager] is amazing and on site from 9 to 6 or even from 9 to 7 and they ring me back and email instantly.” Another relative said, “100% I would complain as I’m comfortable with the staff and can tell them anything really. I’ve not met the new manager but have never had an issue.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff looked at various options for people when in the community. This ensured people’s experience when in the community was smooth and minimised stressful events that could trigger their anxiety. For example, the weather could impact on people accessing the community and staff were aware of this.

Support plans contained information about staff supporting people to access any care and support treatment they needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the people they supported, including awareness of what was important to them in their daily lives. People were encouraged and supported to participate in events and activities of their choosing, which included opportunities for holidays and other meaningful experiences.

The service recognised the impact of inequality on individuals and demonstrated a commitment to addressing and minimising this. Staff were aware of their role in promoting equity and inclusion, ensuring that people’s rights, preferences, and cultural identities were respected and upheld in all aspects of care and support.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

At the time of this inspection the provider was not supporting anybody who was receiving care during the final stages of life. Limited information was found in support plans in relation to people’s future preferences or wishes.