Independent Supported Living and Disabilities Ltd Also known as ISLAD

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Staff completed comprehensive reviews of people’s needs and individual risks since the last assessment. People’s relatives told us they were involved and consulted around the support plans. People’s care documentation included evidence of how people were involved in their support reviews. Staff contacted people’s social workers for support to review people’s individual needs when required. There were no new people who had started using the personal care support from this service since the last assessment. However, the registered manager had clear systems and processes in place to ensure people’s needs would be robustly assessed prior to staff starting to support them.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. The provider now considered national best practice guidance on supporting people with a learning disability and/or autism in how they worked with people, their relatives and other professionals to ensure people were supported to be as independent as possible, and that they had equal access to healthcare and self-development, leisure and social opportunities. The provider implemented a range of changes in their systems and processes and additional staff training to better align how they supported people to current evidence-based guidance.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. People’s relatives commented staff worked well with other healthcare and social care professionals to ensure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed. People’s individual records evidenced how staff and the management team worked with other services and as a team to ensure people had good, joined-up care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People and their relatives told us they were supported to access healthcare services as and when needed. People’s records confirmed this, and staff could clearly explain how they helped people to attend healthcare appointments and take care of their health and wellbeing. People were supported to access, for example, their GP, specialist healthcare services, optician or dentist.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People and their relatives told us they were happy with how their care and support enabled them to do what they liked, to remain safe and well and to be as independent as possible in their own homes. People’s support plans were clear on what support people required to achieve that. Staff we spoke with knew well what was important to people and what outcomes they wanted from their support.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. However, when people might have lacked capacity to make decisions around their personal care, medicines or support around managing their individual risks when accompanied by staff on outings, appropriate mental capacity assessments and best interest decision records were not always in place. People’s representatives told us they were consulted and involved in decision making around people’s care. We saw evidence of the provider approaching social services for support around mental capacity assessments and working with other healthcare professionals in relation to best interest decisions around individual treatments. This was an area for improvement. The provider was responsive to our feedback and had already recognised an improvement need around this in their own governance audits prior to the assessment.