Maple Court

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed 1 quality statement in the effective key question and found areas of concern. The score for this area has been combined with the scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Though the assessment of this area indicated areas of concern since the last inspection, our rating for the key question remains good. Some improvements were needed to elements of recording and practice in relation to supporting people with their nutritional and hydration needs. People were generally happy with the quality of the food.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We observed people who required food cutting into bite sized pieces, had been presented with food they were unable to eat; they then had to wait for further assistance. We discussed this with the registered manager, who said they would raise this with staff. Some people told us they often had a long wait before their meals were served. People were, however, mostly positive about the food. Examples included, “The food is nice. I have no complaints” and, “After tea you can get a drink and biscuits. It’s not very often I need more food, there’s plenty at mealtime.”

Due to the conflicting information within people’s records, we could not be assured staff always knew how best to support somebody. However, the registered manager shared that they engaged with and sought advice from specialists to support people’s nutrition and hydration needs.

People’s records about their nutrition and hydration needs were not always detailed and contained inconsistent information. Actions had not always been taken when people had lost weight. The provider did, however, use recognised tools to assess and monitor people’s needs.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.