Archived: Maple House

Maple House provides personal care and accommodation for up to eight adults with a learning disability. At the time of our visit, seven people were using the service.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff knew how to identify abuse and where they should report their concerns. People were protected from the risk of avoidable harm by having appropriate risk assessments in place.

The provider had effective recruitment procedures to make safe recruitment decisions when employing new staff. We saw staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs.

There was an on-going training programme in place for staff to ensure they were kept up to date and aware of current good practice. They received regular supervision to monitor their performance and development needs.

People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff promoted people’s independence and their privacy were respected. We found support plans were individualised and reflected each person’s needs and preferences.

People’s medicines were managed safely and people received appropriate healthcare support. People were supported to eat and drink enough to help keep them healthy.

Staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support. Information about advocacy services was available to people who used the service.

There were systems were in place to monitor and check the quality of care provided to improve the service and take action when required. Complaints and concerns were dealt with appropriately.

During this visit we found that the provider had taken appropriate action to ensure that they adhered to fire regulations. We saw that fire doors were either closed or held by a device that would release and the door would close by itself in the event of a fire.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. During our visit we noted that doors were being held open by different objects and this could compromise the safety of people, staff and visitors.

Is the service effective?

People who were able to go out independently told us about where they go, what they do and how much they value the freedom and independence. It was clear from the care plans and records we saw that where possible, people who used the service had been involved in writing them.

Is the service caring?

People had their dignity and privacy respected. We noticed people and staff using first names when speaking to each other. Staff told us that there were activities to encourage community involvement. People who used this service were able to make choices with regard to their daily lives such as what they would like to wear or to eat or whether they would like to join in any activities.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We looked at the care records of three people and found them to be comprehensive.

Is the service well-led?

People said they were well supported by staff in their daily lives. We observed staff interacting with the people who used the service in a very kind, respectful, and professional manner.

People, or their representatives, were provided with suitable information to enable them to make informed decisions about their care. People's needs were properly assessed and they were provided with with care and support to meet their identified needs. Risk assessments had been developed to address identified areas of risk, which meant people were supported safely.

Arrangements were in place to manage medicines safely. There were appropriate levels of staffing to provide care and support within the service and support people to access local amenities and recreational facilities.

People using the service and their families and friends were given information about how to make complaints.

People understood the care they received, in ways that made sense to them, and were able to express their views and choices, including participating in the community. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare and everyone had individual care plans. Staff had understood people's needs and worked to meet them. People were kept safe from the risk of abuse through safe practices, policies and procedures. Staff understood the nature of abuse, were trained to look out for it and knew how to report concerns. People who use the service and their families did not have any safety concerns. Staff were properly trained and supported in their roles and the provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.