We inspected the service on 15 January 2018. The inspection was unannounced. Maun View is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for people who live at the service. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Maun View accommodates up to 77 older people across four units over two floors. On the day of our inspection 54 people were using the service.

A registered manager was in post and they were available during 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 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The risks to people’s safety were reduced because staff had attended safeguarding adults training, could identify the different types of abuse, and knew the procedure for reporting concerns. Risk assessments had been completed in areas where people’s safety could be at risk. Staff were recruited in a safe way and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to keep them safe.

Accidents and incidents were investigated. Assessments of the risks associated with the environment which people lived were carried out and people had personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) in place. Safe procedures for the management of people’s medicines were in place. We identified some minor areas which the registered manager needed to address in relation to the cleanliness of the service, however staff had the knowledge and equipment to manage any infection control issues.

People were supported by staff who received an induction, were well trained and received regular assessments of their work. People felt staff understood how to support them effectively. The service used nationally recognised tools to assess the needs of people who lived at the service

People lived in an environment which met their needs and they had access to information in formats which they understood. People’s health and nutritional needs were well managed and staff acted on advice given to them by health professionals to manage people’s health and nutritional needs.

Staff knew how to support people to make decisions and ensure their rights were respected, working in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. 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 support this practice.

People were cared for by staff who showed kindness and consideration of their needs and had knowledge of their preferences and views on their care. They were supported with respect by staff who maintained their privacy and dignity whilst encouraging and supporting their independency.

People received individualised care from staff who had the information they required to provide that care. People were supported to take part in a range of social activities and maintain relationships that were important to them. People were comfortable when raising concerns or complaints and felt issues raised were addressed to their satisfaction. People’s wishes in relation to their end of life care were supported with care and empathy.

The service undertook a robust auditing process to maintain the quality of the service. The registered manager worked with people, relatives, staff and external professionals to provide an open and transparent service for the people who lived there.

We received information that alleged the staffing levels at Maun View were not sufficient to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Due to the complex needs of people using the service we were not always able to obtain their views of the care they received. We spent time observing the care provided on each of the four separate units within Maun View to gather evidence of their experience of the service. We checked care records, spoke with people who used the service and three visiting relatives. We also spoke with 12 staff, the manager and deputy manager.

People who used the service, their relatives and their advocates told us they felt people had their needs met by sufficient staff. A person who used the service told us, “The staff are pretty good. They (the staff) come in good time usually.” (In response to using the call bell).I sometimes have to wait but that’s because they’ve got so many others to help.”

We found that people who used the service could not always expect a consistent number of staff to meet their needs safely.

We undertook this inspection to check what improvements the provider had made since our last inspection on 29 May 2013. We also checked the way medicines were managed in response to information we had received.

We found that there had been improvements in the records so that people who used the service could be confident that their personal records were accurate, fit for purpose and held securely.

We found that there were improved systems in place to identify, monitor and manage risks to people who used the service.

We found that medicines were managed safely.

We carried out this inspection because we had received concerns about the service.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service, because the people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with five people who used the service that were able to tell us they were happy and cared for at Maun View.

A relative told us they were very satistfied and found that the accommodation was homely.

We found that people were being assessed for any risks to their health and wellbeing and staff were responding to any changes in people's needs in a timely way.There were appropriate security arrangements in place and medicines were being handled safely.

We found that people using the service were not always supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs.

On the day of our visit to Maun View there were forty six people living at the care home

We spoke with two people who live at Maun View. They told us that: “I quite like it here, the staff are very good, and I’ve got what I need.” “I’m alright here.” Some people who live at Maun View have communication difficulties, so we observed how staff interacted with the people who live at the care home, and this did not raise any concerns, as we saw people being spoken with in a friendly and respectful manner.

Our observations of people at Maun View showed them to be relaxed and content. We spoke with two people who live at the care home and they told us: “I’m quite happy thank you.” “The staff are very nice.”

We performed the unannounced inspection on 8 and 9 October 2015. Maun View Care Home is run and managed by Runwood Homes Limited The service provides care and support for 77 older adults, including people living with dementia. On the day of our inspection 63 people were using the service. The service is provided across four units on two floors with a passenger lift connecting the two floors.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our 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.

When we last inspected the service on 19 December 2013 we found people who used the service did not always have enough staff to care for them. The provider sent us an action plan telling us how they would address this issue. During this inspection we found there were some areas in which staffing deployment needs improvement to ensure that there are staff available when people need them

People were protected from the risk of abuse and staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities if they suspected abuse was happening. The registered manager shared information with the local authority when needed.

People received their medicines as prescribed and the management of medicines was safe.

People were encouraged to make independent decisions and staff were aware of legislation to protect people who lacked capacity when decisions were made in their best interests. staff were aware of the principles within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and had not deprived people of their liberty without applying for the required authorisation.

People were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition. Specialist diets were provided if needed. Referrals were made to health care professionals when needed.

People who used the service, or their representatives, were encouraged to contribute to the planning of their care.

People were treated in a caring and respectful manner and staff delivered support in a relaxed and considerate manner.

People who used the service, or their representatives, were encouraged to be involved in decisions and systems were in place to monitor the quality of service provision. People also felt they could report any concerns to the management team and felt they would be taken seriously.