We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wirral Independent Living & Learning on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Wirral Independent Living & Learning, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service: There was a strong person-centred culture. Staff knew the needs and preferences of the people they were supporting extremely well. Staff had developed very positive relationships with people and were seen to display kindness as well as compassionate support to them.
People received personalised care and support which was in line with their care plans. People's privacy and dignity was respected, and independence promoted. Staff were committed to improving the quality of life and opportunities available for people. Staff cared and supported people to a very high standard always ensuring it was the person making decisions. The service had developed community links to reflect the needs of people. It worked with colleges and charities as well as health and social care professionals to deliver improved outcomes and experiences for people.
Staff showed a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities for keeping people safe from harm.
Medicines were managed safely, and people received their prescribed medicines at the right time. Health needs were understood and met.
There were sufficient numbers of safely recruited and suitably qualified staff to meet people's individual needs.
Staff received a range of training and support appropriate to their role and people's needs.
The registered provider complied with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Staff understood and respected people's right to make their own decisions where possible and encouraged people to make decisions about the care they received. Consent had been sought before any care had been delivered in line with legal requirements.
People knew how to make a complaint and they were confident about complaining should they need to.
The registered manager with the support of the operations manager were described as supportive and approachable. They demonstrated a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities as a registered person. They worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure people received care and support that was consistent with their assessed needs.
Rating at last inspection: Good (Date published 11 October 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based upon the ratings at the last inspection.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our re-inspection schedule.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
The manager was registered with the Care Quality Commission. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We looked at the medication records for five people. The medication procedure for staff was to prompt people or to administer their medication. Records informed that support staff would record all medication on the provider’s medication record sheets. One person’s records and information in relation to covert medication practice for staff to follow. We discussed this practice with the register manager.
We looked at records relating to the safety of the office premises and its equipment, which were correctly recorded. We were shown where confidential records were stored in lockable filling cabinets and password protected on the computers.
People received sufficient quantities of food and drink and had a choice in the meals that they received if this was part of their person centred care plans (PCCP). Their satisfaction with the dietary options provided had been checked. Where people’s weight changed this was recognised, with appropriate action taken to meet the person’s nutritional needs.
The provider had complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and its associated codes of practice in the delivery of care. We found that the staff had followed the requirements and principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff we spoke with had an understanding of what their role was and what their obligations where in order to maintain people’s rights.
We found that the person centred care plans and risk assessment monthly review records were all up to date in the five files looked at. There was updated information that reflected the changes of people’s health.
People told us they felt safe with staff and this was confirmed by people’s relatives who we spoke with. The registered manager had a good understanding of safeguarding. The registered manager had responded appropriately to allegations of abuse and had ensured reporting to the local authority and the CQC as required; however senior staff required briefing on the safeguarding policy to ensure they were up to date with the provider’s procedure.
Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to ensure that appropriate action was taken to prevent further incidences. Staff knew what to do if any difficulties arose whilst supporting somebody, or if an accident happened.
The staffing levels were seen to be sufficient at all times to support people and meet their needs and everyone we spoke with considered there was adequate staff on duty.
The service used safe systems for recruiting new staff. These included using Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and annual self-disclosure checks made with the manager. The staff files did not include a photograph of the staff. They had an induction programme in place that included training staff to ensure they were competent in the role they were doing at the WILL. Staff told us they did feel supported by the registered manager, the office manager and team leaders.
The five person centred care plans we looked at gave details of people’s medical history and medication and information about the person’s life and their preferences. People were all registered with a local GP and records showed that people were supported to see a GP, dentist, optician, and chiropodist as needed.
All the relatives we spoke with told us they were part of the care planning process and we found the service respected people's decisions as to how they wanted to be supported. We found although staff had not received official training about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 some were knowledgeable about the issues of consent.
We found the service had enough staff to support people and had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure suitably skilled members of staff were employed.
We found the service had a complaints policy and procedure in place and any complaints had been responded to appropriately.
We found that the agency had safeguarding measures in place and that staff were trained to identify and act if there were any safeguarding issues.
We found that staff received regular training and supervisions to make sure they could support people who used the service. One relative told us 'staff are friendly yet keep a professional distance in order to allow my daughter to reach her full potential.'
We found that the agency had systems for monitoring quality assurance in place. Relatives told us that the agency made it very clear how to raise concerns and use the complaints system but knew they could always talk to the manager if they had any concerns. Relatives and the Wirral Contracting Team told us they did not have any concerns about the support people received.