CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Maples Residential Care Home Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and inspectors found enough staff to respond to their needs. Recruitment checks, risk assessments, safeguarding procedures and building checks were in place, but instructions for some medicines given when needed lacked detail.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had training, supervision and information about people's needs. Inspectors saw that consent was sought, but staff discussions did not fully show a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were friendly, warm and respectful. They supported people's independence, privacy, communication and relationships with family.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised to people's routines, preferences and communication methods. People helped plan and review their care and chose activities that suited them.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and most staff were positive about how the home was run. Quality checks and feedback systems were in place, although a complete overview of staff training was not available during the inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2018
The Maples Residential Care Home Limited is rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with some medicine and staff-record issues to check.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 22 November 2017. The inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, managers and care staff. They reviewed care records, recruitment records and other documents.
The home supported seven people with learning disabilities or autism. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff were caring and there were enough staff to meet people's needs. The home was clean and maintained, medicines were generally stored and given safely, and people were supported with food, health appointments, activities and independence.
The inspectors also found some areas needing attention. Instructions for some medicines given only when needed lacked detail. Staff understanding of mental capacity law was not always clear, and a full overview of completed staff training was not available during the visit.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection in September 2015.
People felt safe
People described the home as safe. Staff knew about individual risks and used consistent approaches to help people who became anxious.
“People felt safe living at The Maples and there were enough staff to respond to people's needs in a timely way.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm and positive interactions. Staff respected privacy and helped people remain as independent as they wished.
“Staff approached people with friendliness and spoke about them with warmth and affection.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's routines, preferences and ways of communicating. People were involved in planning their care and future activities.
“Staff were responsive to people's needs and had a good knowledge of how they preferred their support to be provided.” from the report
Choice and activities
People chose whether to go out, stay at home or attend activities. They were supported with community links, health appointments and personal interests.
“People chose to take part in a variety of social activities which they enjoyed.” from the report
Clean and maintained home
The home was clean, and checks were carried out on the building and equipment.
“The home was clean and well maintained.” from the report
Instructions for some medicines
seriousGuidance for medicines given only when needed did not contain enough detail. Inspectors said this could mean people were given these medicines when they did not need them.
“However, the guidelines in place for staff to follow to ensure these medicines were given consistently lacked detail which meant people could be given medicines when they did not need them.” from the report
Understanding of mental capacity law
needs fixingThe management team understood the relevant principles, but discussions with staff did not show that they all understood the legislation well.
“Despite this our discussions with them did not assure us they had a good understanding of the legislation.” from the report
Training records
needs fixingStaff said they had completed training, but the home could not provide an overview of completed training during the inspection because a new electronic system was being introduced.
“Staff told us they had completed training but at the time of our visit an overview of completed training was not available.” from the report
Support for staff
minorMost staff said they felt supported, but one staff member said they did not feel supported or listened to and later resigned. The manager said they would speak with other staff about this.
“However, another said they did not feel supported or listened to by managers, and that they had raised this issue.” from the report
- 01What detailed instructions are now in place for medicines given only when needed, and how do you check they are given appropriately?
- 02How do you check that staff understand the Mental Capacity Act and can apply it in day-to-day care?
- 03Can you show me the current overview of staff training and explain how you keep it up to date?
- 04How do people choose and review their care, activities and future plans?
- 05How do staff raise concerns if they feel unsupported or unheard by managers?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection in September 2015. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 2018 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 The Maples Residential Care Home Limited
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Maples Residential Care Home Limited →
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 March 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 Solihull
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. 78 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.