CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Maple House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems and arrangements to prevent and manage infections.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and understood people’s needs. People were supported with health appointments, food, drink and day-to-day decisions, although not all staff had recently had formal supervision.
- Caring?
- Good
- No separate rating was given for Caring. Inspectors observed kind and courteous interactions and positive relationships between people and staff.
- Responsive?
- Good
- No separate rating was given for Responsive. Inspectors found that care took account of people’s preferences and personal circumstances.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had effective audits, clear responsibilities and systems to manage risks and improve care. People, relatives and staff said the manager was approachable and supportive.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, with regular staff supervision still needing attention.
The inspection visit took place on 20 December 2022. One inspector spoke with people, staff, the manager, relatives and a health professional. They also checked care records, staff files, medicines records, training, audits and the home’s policies.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable risk assessments and staff who understood people’s needs and choices.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, which was rated Requires Improvement. Problems with fire doors, shower equipment, first aid supplies, food storage and quality checks had been addressed. The previous breaches of Regulations 15 and 17 no longer applied.
Inspectors noted that not all staff had recently received a formal supervision meeting. The manager sent an action plan after the inspection, and CQC recommended regular formal supervision.
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw staff treating people kindly and courteously. People had positive relationships with the staff supporting them.
“Throughout our visit we observed staff interact with people who used the service in a kind and courteous way.” from the report
Safe care and staffing
The home had enough staff and used risk assessments to guide safe support. Staff knew people’s health needs and how to respond to changes.
“There were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines records contained important information, staff were trained and audits were carried out. Inspectors found no missing signatures on medicine records.
“MAR sheets were completed correctly and there were no missing signatures.” from the report
Improvements made
The home had corrected problems found at the previous inspection, including issues with fire doors, shower heads, food storage and first aid supplies.
“Enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 15.” from the report
Clear management checks
The management team used audits and action plans to monitor care, medicines, care plans and health and safety.
“Effective systems were in place to quality assure the services provided, manage risks and drive improvement.” from the report
Staff supervision
needs fixingNot all staff had recently received a formal supervision meeting. The manager provided an action plan, but families should check whether this has now been completed.
“However, we noted not all staff had received a formal supervision meeting recently.” from the report
- 01Has every staff member now received a formal supervision meeting, and when will the next meetings take place?
- 02How are staff kept up to date when a person’s health needs, choices or preferences change?
- 03How do you check that medicines records, care plans and health and safety checks remain accurate?
- 04How are people supported to choose activities, food and how they spend their time?
- 05How do you collect and act on feedback from people, relatives and staff?
This was a follow-up inspection after the previous Requires Improvement rating; the report gives ratings for Safe, Effective and Well-led, while no separate ratings are given for Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 January 2023 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, February 2020
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but safety checks and quality monitoring were not reliable enough.
This was a planned inspection on 21 January 2020. One inspector reviewed records, medicines, staff files, health and safety information, and how the home was managed. They spoke with one person, staff, the registered manager and two relatives, and observed care where people could not speak with them.
People were generally treated with kindness and respect. Staff knew people well, supported their choices and independence, and provided personalised care. People had activities, contact with relatives and access to health professionals. Medicines were recorded accurately and staffing and recruitment were suitable.
The main problems were with safety and management checks. Three fire doors did not close fully, shower fittings could contaminate drinking water, and some first aid supplies and food were out of date or stored incorrectly. The systems meant to find these problems had not worked effectively.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Caring and Responsive were rated Good. Safe, Effective and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. The provider was required to send an action plan, and CQC said it would monitor progress and return for another inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were kind and helpful. Inspectors saw relaxed, caring interactions and found that staff knew people's likes, dislikes and preferences.
“During our visit, we saw people were relaxed around staff and the interaction between them was of a caring nature.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff useful information about people's needs and preferences. People were encouraged to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities of their choice, attend places of worship and stay in touch with relatives and friends.
“People were encouraged to take part in activities of their choice and lived their lives how they wanted.” from the report
Medicines and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks and accurate medicines records. Staff received training and were supported through supervision.
“We saw the MAR were completed accurately when staff had administered medicines to people and there were no gaps in signatures.” from the report
Fire doors and water safety
seriousThree fire doors did not close fully. Shower fittings could allow contaminated water to flow back into the drinking water supply. Inspectors said this put people, staff and visitors at risk.
“This put people, staff and visitors to the service at risk in the event of a fire.” from the report
Expired supplies and unsafe food storage
needs fixingSome first aid and urine-testing items were out of date. Two opened food items were not dated or stored in sealed containers.
“During our visit, we noted a number of first aid items were expired.” from the report
Checks did not find problems
seriousThe home's audits covered areas such as fire safety and food, but they did not identify several important problems. This resulted in a breach of good governance.
“However, we found that these checks were not always robust.” from the report
- 01Have all three fire doors been repaired and checked, and how often are they now tested?
- 02What has been done to prevent shower water from contaminating the drinking water supply?
- 03How do you check that first aid supplies, testing products and food are within date?
- 04What changes have been made to the audit system since this inspection?
- 05What progress has been made on the action plan, and when was it last reviewed?
This was a planned full inspection covering the premises, care and all five CQC questions; it followed a previous Good rating published on 28 October 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 February 2020 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
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2020Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 February 2019.
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 Redbridge
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 £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.