CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People and relatives said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and support needed to meet people’s needs. People were supported with consent, food, health care and independence.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People and relatives said staff were caring, and people were involved in decisions about their support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. People were supported to communicate, follow interests, maintain relationships and raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, regular checks and a clear focus on improving care. The home worked with health and social care professionals.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care across all five areas.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 04 June 2019. One inspector spoke with people using the home, relatives and staff. They also reviewed care plans, staff records, medicines information and the home’s monitoring records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people felt safe, staff knew people well, and care was planned around individual needs, choices and independence.
The home was clean and suitable for the people living there. Staff supported people with medicines, health care, meals, activities and relationships. The previous inspection rating was also Good, published on 14 December 2016.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff knew how to respond to concerns.
“People and their relatives told us they felt safe and staff were supportive.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed good relationships between staff and people. Staff respected people’s dignity, choices, culture and independence.
“People were treated well, supported and their diversity was respected.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people’s needs, preferences, histories and communication requirements. People were supported to make choices and develop independence.
“Care plans were person centred and focused on what people could do for themselves and areas they felt they needed support with.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to take part in hobbies, community activities, education, holidays and visits with family and friends.
“Staff supported and encouraged people to pursue hobbies and interests inside and outside the home environment.” from the report
Quality checks
Managers and staff carried out regular audits and used meetings and action plans to monitor and improve the service.
“There were effective processes in place to monitor the quality of the service and to make any improvements if required.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are my relative’s individual risks reviewed, and how will you support safe independence?
- 02How will you make sure my relative receives medicines as prescribed and that records remain complete?
- 03How will you support my relative’s communication needs and record any changes?
- 04Which activities, education or community opportunities could be provided to match my relative’s interests?
- 05How will my family be involved in care reviews and raising any concerns?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 July 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, December 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with improvements made since earlier medicines and quality-checking breaches.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 9 November 2016. One inspector spoke with two people living at the home, three staff members and the acting manager. They also observed care, checked records for three people, and looked around the building and grounds.
The home supported five people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. Risks were assessed, staffing levels were suitable, and staff knew how to respond to safeguarding concerns and emergencies.
People were supported by trained staff who knew them well. Inspectors found kind and respectful relationships, personalised care plans, support with health, food, activities and relationships, and systems for listening to people's views and handling complaints.
The overall rating was Good, with Good ratings in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says the home had fixed the breaches found at the previous inspection in medicines management and quality assurance.
Safe medicines
Inspectors checked medicines for three people and found no omissions or errors. Staff had training and regular checks were in place.
“Medicines were administered and stored safely.” from the report
Kind, respectful care
Staff knew people well, communicated patiently and respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
“Throughout our inspection we observed positive interactions between staff and people using the service.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in activities at home and in the community, including social clubs, local events, shopping and visits.
“People had individual activity programmes which detailed there weekly chosen activities.” from the report
Improved quality checks
The home had strengthened its audits and action plans since the previous inspection. Inspectors found checks were regular and followed the provider's policy.
“At this inspection improvements had been made and quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided which were conducted on a regular basis and in line with the provider's policy.” from the report
Acting manager in post
minorThere was no registered manager in post at the inspection. The acting manager was applying to register with the CQC, so families should check the current management position.
“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.” from the report
- 01Has the acting manager now completed registration with the CQC, and who is responsible for managing the home today?
- 02How are medicines audits and stock checks carried out now, and how are any errors or missed doses followed up?
- 03How often are care plans and risk assessments reviewed with each person and their relatives or advocate?
- 04How are people supported to choose and take part in activities outside the home?
- 05How are people helped to understand and make a complaint in a way that suits their communication needs?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five rating areas, including checks on whether breaches found at the 10 November 2015 inspection had been fixed. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 2016 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities →
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Maple House - Care Home Learning Disabilities →
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Bromley
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 83 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.