CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Runwood
Maun View
261 Chesterfield Road South, Mansfield, NG19 7EL
Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.
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.
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
Staffing and call bells
seriousThere 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
seriousA 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 fixingThere 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
seriousAudits 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 fixingSome 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
- 01What changes have been made to staffing in areas where people need supervision, and what evidence shows that call bells are now answered promptly?
- 02How are medicines now checked, stored, dated and recorded, including controlled drugs and 'as required' medicines?
- 03How do you check that each person's risk assessment and care plan is being followed in practice?
- 04How are people and relatives now involved in writing and reviewing care plans?
- 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.
Every inspection of Maun View
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- March 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- 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.
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.
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.