Liral Veget Training and Recruitment Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

The last rating for this key question was requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement.

Requires Improvement: This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

During our assessment we identified one breach of the regulations. We found the provider was not working within the principles of the MCA and appropriate legal authorisations.

Despite the above, relatives told us, they were involved in assessment of needs and the assessments went well to ensure the care people get was accurate.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s needs were assessed to ensure these could be met. One relative told us, “Yes they [care workers] did, we had some meetings, and they said what they could provide.” The registered manager carried out an initial assessment of each person’s needs, to see if the service was suitable for them.

Although the assessments looked at people’s medical conditions, physical and mental health, mobility, nutrition, choices, and people’s home environment, the provider primarily focused on people’s personal care needs.
Where appropriate, people and relatives were involved in this assessment. This information was used as a basis for developing personalised care plans, to meet each person’s personal care needs.
 

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

At our last inspection the provider had failed to develop health action plans to support the management of healthcare needs, we made a recommendation.

At this assessment, the registered manager told us that while it will be the main care provider which usually contacts external professionals, Liral Veget Training and Recruitment staff also make referrals and contact external health professionals when needed.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

At our last inspection the provider had failed to ensure applications to the Court of Protection were made where necessary. We made a recommendation about this. At this assessment we found the provider was in breach of Regulation 11.

We found the provider was not working within the principles of the MCA and appropriate legal authorisations. For example, people were assessed as lacking mental capacity, however their parents, next of kin or a family member had signed the consent form without appropriate authorisation.

One person was assessed as having mental capacity, however, their care plan stated they are subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and able to make decisions themselves, which was contradictory, as DoLS can only be authorised where a person lacks capacity to understand and make decisions for themselves. The provider told us that there were Court of Protection authorisations for some people where their liberty was being deprived so they could receive care in their homes.