Apple Trees Care & Reablement Centre

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 29 October 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

The service’s assessment started on 2 September 2025

The service demonstrated a strong commitment to ensuring people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. A positive safety culture was evident, with staff actively encouraged to report incidents and engage in learning. The service applied the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards appropriately, with clear documentation of best interest decisions.

Staffing levels generally met the assessed needs of the service, with agency staff used to maintain safe coverage when required. Recruitment processes were safe and thorough, and staff received comprehensive training across key areas such as safeguarding, infection control, and medicine administration.

The physical environment was safe, secure, and well-maintained. Infection prevention and control measures were well embedded. Cleanliness was consistently maintained and staff followed clear protocols and used PPE appropriately.

Medicines were managed safely. Staff were trained in safe administration, and any errors were investigated with findings shared to support learning and improvement.

Leadership within the service was strong, inclusive, and aligned with a clear strategic vision. Staff understood and applied the provider’s values in their daily practice, with a focus on person-centred care and upholding people’s rights. This was reflected in the way staff supported people to make decisions, even when communication was challenging.

Managers were visible, approachable, and supportive. Staff consistently reported feeling valued and able to raise concerns. An open-door policy was in place, and whistle blowing procedures were clearly understood and accessible. This fostered a culture of openness.

Communication across the service was effective. Staff, residents, and families were encouraged to share feedback, and management responded proactively. Regular meetings and supervisions provided structured opportunities for dialogue and reflection.

Governance arrangements were well established. A comprehensive quality monitoring programme was in place, with regular audits and clear accountability. The registered manager and deputy manager worked closely to strengthen quality assurance, particularly in areas such as care planning, medicine management, and incident reporting.

Partnership working was a notable strength. The service maintained strong relationships with health professionals and local authorities, which supported seamless care delivery and positive outcomes. The active recovery unit was an example of how the service supported individuals to regain independence and return to their homes safely.

Continuous learning and innovation were embedded in the service. Staff had access to structured training programs, including specialist modules tailored to the needs of the people they supported. The registered manager participated in the provider’s regular home manager’s meetings, and the provider employs specialist staff to ensure best practice is shared across services.