Maple House

Updated 31 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. This inspection took place on 13 July 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we looked at previous inspection reports and other information we had about the home including notifications, safeguarding information and complaints. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law, like a death or a serious injury. The provider had not had the opportunity to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) as they had not received this document before the inspection. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We collected this information throughout the inspection.

During the inspection visit, we observed staff carrying out their duties, communicating and interacting with people to help us understand the experiences of people. We reviewed a variety of documents. These included two care files, staffing rotas, two staff recruitment files, medicine administration records, minutes from staff and resident meetings, audits, maintenance records, risk assessments, health and safety records, training and supervision records and quality assurance surveys.

We spoke with two people who used the service and with two members of staff, the registered manager. After the inspection we received feedback from one relative and one social care professional who had had recent contact with the service.

Updated 31 August 2017

This inspection took place on 13 July 2017 and was unannounced. The previous inspection was carried out in July 2016 and some concerns around medicines management and records were identified. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made.

Maple House is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for up to six people who have a learning disability and other complex needs. Maple House is situated in a residential area of Folkestone with access to the town centre, leisure centre and public transport. Six people were living at the service at the time of inspection and each had their own personalised bedroom with wash basin. People had access to a lounge, dining room, a kitchen, two bathrooms, toilets and a large garden.

The service had a registered manager, who was also registered manager for the service located next door and who was present throughout the inspection. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines when they should. People were supported to maintain good health and attended appointments and check-ups. Health needs were kept under review and referrals were made when required. People were supported in a safe environment and risks had been identified, and were managed in a way that enabled and encouraged people to live as independent a life as possible.

At this inspection records were in good order and contained current information that was clearly laid out; making them easy to use.

Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of abuse. They had received safeguarding training and were aware of how to recognise and report safeguarding concerns. Staff knew about the whistle blowing policy and were confident they could raise any concerns with the provider or outside agencies if needed.

Equipment and the premises received regular checks and servicing in order to ensure it was safe. The registered manager monitored incidents and accidents to make sure the care provided was safe. Emergency plans were in place so if an emergency happened, like a fire, the staff knew what to do.

A robust system to recruit new staff was in place; this helped to make sure that people were supported by staff that were fit to do so. Throughout the day and night there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s assessed needs. When staff first started to work at the service they were supported to complete an induction programme. Staff continued to be supported with ongoing training, support and supervision. Staff meetings took place. These all gave opportunity for staff to share ideas and discuss any issues.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The registered manager and staff showed that they understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Systems were in place to check if people were at risk of being deprived of their liberty. Systems were in operation to obtain consent from people and to comply with the MCA. People were supported to make decisions and choices about all aspects of their lives.

Staff encouraged people to be involved and feel included in their environment. People were offered activities and participated in social activities when they chose to do so. Staff knew people and their support needs well. The care and support needs of each person were different, and each person’s care plan was personal to them. People had detailed care plans, risk assessments and guidance in place to help staff to support them in an individual way.

Staff were caring, kind and respected people’s privacy and dignity. There were positive and caring interactions between the staff and people and people were comfortable and at ease with the staff.

People were encouraged to eat and drink enough and were offered choices around their meals and hydration needs. Staff understood people’s likes and dislikes and dietary requirements and promoted people to eat a healthy diet.

Staff told us that the service was well led and that they felt very supported by the registered manager to make sure they could support and care for people safely and effectively. Staff said they could go to the registered manager at any time and they would be listened to and suggestions discussed. Quality assurance audits were carried out to identify any shortfalls within the service and how the service could improve. The registered manager had good management oversight and was able to assist us in all aspects of our inspection.