CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Mapledale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found robust risk management, safe recruitment, enough staff, safe medicines systems and good infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed in detail and care plans were kept under review. Staff training, health support, food provision and consent arrangements were found to support good outcomes.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. People were supported to express their views, make choices, maintain their dignity and develop their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and included a broad range of activities and ways to maintain relationships. Communication guides and accessible information helped people understand and express themselves.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team promoted a positive culture and used governance systems to monitor care and records. Staff and relatives said they felt supported and able to give feedback.
What inspectors found, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 and 20 February 2020. One inspector spoke with the manager, deputy manager, care staff, night staff and relatives. They also reviewed care and medicines records, toured the home and observed people's experiences.
The home supported ten people with learning disabilities and complex needs. Inspectors found that people were safe, received effective support, were treated with kindness and dignity, and had care that reflected their needs and preferences.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous rating was also Good, published on 23 August 2017. The original 20-bed home had since been divided into two ten-bed homes, and the service had changed its name and re-registered.
Safety and risk management
Inspectors found that safeguarding procedures, risk assessments and reviews helped protect people from avoidable harm.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse and avoidable harm.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home used communication and lifestyle coordinators to create activities and experiences around individual needs and preferences.
“The provider employed communication and lifestyle coordinators, who worked alongside the staff team to develop exceptionally person-centred activities and experiences.” from the report
Support with health needs
People had detailed health information, including hospital passports, and staff supported them during hospital stays to reduce distress.
“Staff supported people when they were hospitalised by staying with them to minimise potential distress.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed caring interactions and found that staff promoted dignity, privacy, choice and independence.
“People were supported by kind and respectful staff. We observed caring interactions between staff and people living in the home.” from the report
Management oversight
The manager used checks and records to monitor care quality and address issues that were identified.
“The provider had robust governance systems in place which helped the management team ensure the quality of care and support was maintained.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and update my relative's detailed care and risk plans?
- 02How will you support my relative to communicate choices and understand information?
- 03What activities and experiences would be available to match my relative's interests and preferences?
- 04How would you support my relative during a hospital admission or other health appointment?
- 05How can relatives give feedback or raise a concern, and how will the home keep us informed?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care and the premises; the previous Good rating was used for planning after the original 20-bed home was divided into two ten-bed homes and the service re-registered. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 April 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 Mapledale
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- April 2020Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 June 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.