Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Runwood

Maun View

261 Chesterfield Road South, Mansfield, NG19 7EL

Goodpublished 21 February 2025, 18 months ago

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

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, March 2024

Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but serious shortfalls in staffing, medicines, risk management and oversight.

This was an unannounced inspection on 21 and 24 November 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines information, staff files and management records.

People generally said they felt safe and that staff were kind and caring. The home was clean, safe and well maintained. Staff training, support and work with health professionals were rated Good. People were supported to make choices and maintain their independence.

However, call bells were not always answered promptly and staffing did not always provide enough supervision. Medicines were not always stored, checked or recorded safely. Some risks and care plans were not managed consistently. People were not always involved in care planning, and complaints were not always recorded or followed up. Quality checks had not found or fixed these problems.

The overall rating remains Requires Improvement. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while Effective and Caring were rated Good. The home has had a Requires Improvement or Inadequate rating for the last four consecutive inspections.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful care

    People described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors observed that people were treated with dignity and respect.

    People told us that staff were kind and caring. Our observations supported this.from the report
  • Clean and maintained premises

    The home was clean, safe and well maintained. Equipment and premises checks were taking place.

    The premises was safe and well maintained. We raised a couple of potential safety issues which were immediately resolved by the maintenance staff member.from the report
  • Activities

    Inspectors saw excellent interactions during activity sessions, and some people enjoyed activities that mattered to them.

    We observed excellent interactions between activity staff and people during activity sessions and activities staff were focussed and motivated to provide a range of activities for people.from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Staffing and call bells

    serious

    There were not always enough staff in the right areas to supervise people and meet their needs. Call bells were not always answered promptly, creating a risk that people would not receive timely care.

    Call bells were not always responded to promptly during our inspection and records confirmed that a significant number of call bells were not responded to promptly.from the report
  • Risk management

    serious

    A care plan was not being followed for one person at risk of falls. Falls analysis had not considered whether staffing levels contributed to repeated unwitnessed falls.

    One person's care plan was not being followed on the first day of inspection putting them at a higher risk of falls.from the report
  • Care planning

    needs fixing

    There was limited evidence that people had helped plan their care. Some records lacked information about what was important to people and their life history.

    There was limited documented evidence of people's involvement in care records. A range of care plans were in place but some care records were missing information in relation to what was important to people and their life history.from the report
  • Quality checks

    serious

    Audits and checks had not found or corrected several problems before the inspection. This included concerns about staffing, medicines, risks, recruitment, care plans and call bells.

    A range of audits and checks were in place. However, they had not been effective in ensuring that all issues found during the inspection had been identified and acted upon prior to our inspection.from the report
  • Complaints follow-up

    needs fixing

    Some people said they had not received feedback about complaints. Inspectors could not find records of those complaints.

    Some people told us that they had not received feedback on complaints that they had made. We were not able to find records of their complaints during the inspection to resolve this.from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to staffing in areas where people need supervision, and what evidence shows that call bells are now answered promptly?
  2. 02How are medicines now checked, stored, dated and recorded, including controlled drugs and 'as required' medicines?
  3. 03How do you check that each person's risk assessment and care plan is being followed in practice?
  4. 04How are people and relatives now involved in writing and reviewing care plans?
  5. 05How are complaints recorded, answered and followed up if someone remains dissatisfied?

This was an unannounced inspection of the care home, covering the overall quality of the service and both the premises and care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 March 2024 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 Maun View

6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.

  1. March 2024Requires improvementcurrent rating
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Maun View

  2. May 2022Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

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

  3. September 2021Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. April 2020Requires improvementup from Inadequate
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. October 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. June 2019Requires improvementdown from Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. March 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. December 2015Good
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. January 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. November 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. June 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. December 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  13. August 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  14. June 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  15. March 2012

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 March 2012.

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 Runwood Homes Limited

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

Rosedale Court

Rayleigh, SS6
Good
NursingDementia
Rated last monthReport explained

Oldfield House

Doncaster, DN7
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 2 years agoReport explained

Liberty House

Doncaster, DN4
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 9 months agoReport explained

Park View

Witham, CM8
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 2 years agoReport explained

Braywood Gardens

Nottingham, NG4
Good
NursingDementia
Rated 18 months agoReport explained

Park View

Warwick, CV34
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 2 years agoReport explained
Nearby

Other care homes near Mansfield

Thistle Hill Hall

Mansfield, NG19 · 0.6 km
Outstanding
NursingResidential
Rated 6 years agocare home

Wood House

Mansfield, NG18 · 1.3 km
Not yet rated
Residential
Not yet ratedcare home