Maple Manor is a residential care home that provides personal care and support for up to five people who have a learning disability and/or autistic spectrum disorder. On the day of our inspection there were five people living at the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The manager is registered for this service and one other service other local, nearby care service.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Risks to people’s health, welfare and safety had been assessed and guidance provided for staff with recorded action they should take to mitigate these risks.

People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff were provided with training in Safeguarding Adults from abuse. However, policies which guided staff in how to report poor practice had not been reviewed since 2009 and safeguarding people from abuse policy since 2011. These policies contained out of date information and did not provide up to date, relevant guidance in line with local safeguarding protocols and current regulatory requirements.

Staff were provided with training in understanding their roles and responsibilities with regards to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People’s capacity to make decisions about their everyday lives had been assessed and their consent was considered in the planning and provision of their care and support.

People had sufficient amounts to eat and drink to ensure that their dietary and nutrition needs were met. People's care records showed that, where appropriate, support and guidance was sought from health care professionals, including GPs and dentists.

Staff were attentive to people's needs. Staff were able to demonstrate that they knew people well and treated people with dignity and respect.

People were provided with the opportunity to participate in personalised, meaningful activities according to their assessed needs, wishes and preferences. People were encouraged to develop as much independence as possible and learn new life skills.

The provider had a system in place to respond to suggestions, concerns and complaints. However, it was not always evident how complaints had been investigated and with the outcome recorded. The service had a number of ways of gathering people’s views including; one to one monthly meetings and satisfaction surveys. The provider and registered manager carried out a number of quality monitoring audits to help ensure the service was running effectively and to plan for improvement of the service.

Maple Manor provides support and care for up to five people living with learning disabilities and autism. There were four people living in the service when we inspected on 31 March 2015.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People received care that was personalised to them and met their needs and wishes. The atmosphere in the service was friendly and welcoming.

Appropriate recruitment checks on staff were carried out with sufficient numbers employed. Staff had the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs. People were safe and treated with kindness by the staff. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and interacted with people in a caring and compassionate manner.

Staff listened to people and acted on what they said. Staff knew how to recognise and respond to abuse correctly. People were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Staff understood how to minimise risks and provide people with safe care. Care and support was individual and based on the assessed needs of each person. Appropriate arrangements were in place to provide people with their medicines safely.

Staff supported people to be independent and to meet their individual needs and aspirations. People were encouraged to attend appointments with other healthcare professionals to maintain their health and well-being.

People were supported by the manager and staff to make decisions about how they led their lives and wanted to be supported. People were encouraged to pursue their hobbies and interests and participated in a variety of personalised meaningful activities.

People voiced their opinions and had their care needs provided for in the way they wanted. Where they lacked capacity, appropriate actions had been taken to ensure decisions were made in the person’s best interests. People knew how to make a complaint and any concerns were acted on promptly and appropriately.

People were provided with a variety of meals and supported to eat and drink sufficiently. People enjoyed the food and were encouraged to be as independent as possible but where additional support was needed this was provided in a caring, respectful manner.

There was an open and transparent culture in the service. Staff were aware of the values of the service and understood their roles and responsibilities. The manager and provider planned, assessed and monitored the quality of care consistently. Systems were in place that encouraged feedback from people who used the service, relatives, and visiting professionals and this was used to make continual improvements to the service.

During our inspection we used different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. Where people were unable to tell us about their experiences, we used observation and noted people’s responses to staff. We saw that people appeared calm and relaxed in the presence of staff.

We saw that care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed with people who used the service or relatives if they were unable to fully participate.

We saw that staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and promoted their independence. During our discussions with staff we found that they had a good understanding and awareness of people’s care needs and preferences.

There were policies and procedures, records and monitoring systems in place to ensure that staff had received training to enable them to carry out their roles. Staff told us they felt supported by senior staff. One person told us “I couldn’t ask for a better manager, very supportive.”

We saw that there was a complaints policy and procedure in place. The staff were able to explain the complaints procedure. The service had not received any complaints since the last inspection. We saw recordings of telephone conversations with relatives that reflected their satisfaction with the service.

When we visited Maple Manor on 29 January 2013, we used different methods, including observation to help us understand the experiences of the three people currently living at the home. This was because some people had complex needs which meant they were not able to easily communicate verbally with us. We observed that the staff interacted well with the people using the service and made sure that they were involved in making decisions about how their care and support was planned and delivered.

Maple Manor was very homely and the people who used the service had full access to all areas and were supported to pursue their various interests in the home and externally at day centres, clubs and colleges.

We saw that people's care records contained detailed information to show how they were to be cared for. The people using the service, or a person on their behalf had been involved in the planning of the care and support needed and decision processes were clearly recorded.

Staff had been provided with a range of training opportunities to keep their knowledge updated and ensure they were prepared to carry out their role and responsibilities in keeping people safe and well cared for.