Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Maple Health

Maple Manor

3 Amber Court, Berechurch Hall Road, Colchester, CO2 9GE

Goodpublished 19 November 2025, 9 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, consistent care but weaknesses in fire safety, staff training and provider oversight.

This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on four dates, spoke with people, staff and relatives, reviewed care and staff records, and checked medicines, risks, training and quality checks.

People were treated kindly and respectfully. Staff understood people's communication needs, supported choice and independence, and helped people access healthcare and community activities. Staffing levels, medicines, infection control and recruitment were found to be suitable.

The main problems were fire safety arrangements, gaps in staff training and weak oversight by the provider. The service was rated Requires Improvement for Safe, Effective and Well-led. The previous overall rating was Good, published in September 2018.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful care

    People received compassionate care. Staff protected privacy and dignity and supported people in a way that respected their choices and independence.

    People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people's privacy and dignity.from the report
  • Suitable staffing

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and support activities both at home and in the community. Relatives also said staffing was reliable.

    The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available to meet people's needs.from the report
  • Medicines handled safely

    Medicine records were accurate and staff gave medicines as prescribed. Checks were in place to reduce the risk of inappropriate over-medication.

    Accurate medicine records were maintained, and Medication Administration Records [MAR] demonstrated people received their medicines as they shouldfrom the report
  • Good communication

    Staff understood how people communicated, including through pictures, symbols, signs and other individual methods. Relatives said communication with the service was good.

    Relatives told us communication with the service was good.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Fire evacuation risks

    serious

    There were not enough trained fire marshals on every shift. Emergency evacuation plans did not fully explain some people's distress behaviours, medicines and reduced staffing at night. This was a breach of Regulation 12.

    This placed people at potential risk of harm. This was a breach of Regulation 12 [Safe care and treatment]from the report
  • Incomplete staff training

    needs fixing

    Some required training was missing or overdue. This included Oliver McGowan learning disability and autism training, practical physical restraint training and checks of competency for emergency seizure medicines.

    The provider did not always make sure staff had the skills, knowledge, and experience to deliver effective care and support.from the report
  • Weak provider oversight

    serious

    The provider did not identify or deal with problems quickly enough. Actions from provider meetings and external recommendations were not routinely followed up. This was a breach of Regulation 17.

    The provider did not have sufficient oversight of what was happening at the service.from the report
  • Incomplete best-interest records

    minor

    Where decisions were made in people's best interests, records did not say who had been involved or consulted. The manager said improvements would be made.

    Information relating to who had been involved and consulted in the decision-making process was not recorded.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How many trained fire marshals are now available on every shift, including at night?
  2. 02Have every person's Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan been updated to cover distress behaviours, sedative medicines and night-time staffing?
  3. 03Which staff have completed the required learning disability and autism training and practical physical restraint training?
  4. 04How are staff competency checks for emergency seizure medicines carried out and recorded?
  5. 05What action has the provider taken to improve oversight, follow up actions and give the registered manager regular supervision?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their ratings were carried over from the previous comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 December 2023 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Maple Manor

4 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. December 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Maple Manor

  2. November 2019Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. May 2017Goodstayed Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. May 2015Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. February 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. February 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. June 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 June 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Same provider

Other services run by Maple Health UK Limited

4 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Maple House

Colchester, CO2
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple View

Colchester, CO2
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple Cottage

Colchester, CO2
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple Lodge

Colchester, CO2
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained
Nearby

Other care homes near Colchester

Maple House

Colchester, CO2 · 0.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple Lodge

Colchester, CO2 · 0.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple Cottage

Colchester, CO2 · 0.0 km
Requires improvement
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Maple View

Colchester, CO2 · 0.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Hilton House

Colchester, CO3 · 1.5 km
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home