Independent Supported Living and Disabilities Ltd Also known as ISLAD

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We identified 1 breach of the regulations. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice. People were at risk of social isolation because the provider did not ensure they proactively plan and work with people to have meaningful activities and opportunities for social engagement according to their interests. People were not supported and empowered to be independent and be in control of their lives.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People and their relatives were not always encouraged to take part in discussions about wider care and support, including care plan reviews. Relatives told us they were not involved in care planning and could not confirm that their loved ones were in control of planning their care. When discussing one person’s access to activities, one relative told us, “It's always been there's nothing local, other than going to the local library, they don’t seem to be proactive in having a conversation with us, or [Person] to help [Person] to do what [Person] likes to do” and, “[Person] is quite sociable, but they don’t take [Person] anywhere.” One person told us, “Yes I do feel [I am in control of my care and support]. Yes, I can see my [relative] and see my friends”. The person added it would also depend on the number of staffing as they would need staff to go out. The person was not sure if they had any control over plans of care and support.

The manager told us how people were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment, and wellbeing. The manager said, “People have key worker meetings. We ask people on a daily basis what they want to do and what activities. For example, we do activities plan and if they change their minds, we are following their choices.” The manager told us how they supported people to maintain relationships and networks that were important to them. The manager said, “People have devices to keep in touch with people. People visit families and families come here. People maintain friends and they can come and see them. [People living here] seem to get on well, and they were chatting. They like going out together. We review activities and what they liked to do. We support them and arrange it for them.” Staff we spoke with told us they tried to encourage people to be as independent as possible. This included involving people in everyday activities such as cooking, shopping and laundry. Staff told us people who used the service received visits from relatives, and people were supported to access the community. Although they told us people were encouraged to do activities, we have gathered evidence that demonstrated this was not always the case.

We observed people and staff interacting well and in a friendly manner. However, we also observed staff coming into one person’s room without knocking.

The care plans and risk assessments noted people’s likes, dislikes, choices and support needed. It also included information about supporting people to maintain their independence and skills they would like to develop. However, from the daily notes review it was clear different tasks were completed by staff only, rather than working together with people to help them maintain their independence, skills and make choices. It did not demonstrate staff were aware how people should be prompted and communicated with about their daily tasks and choices. This meant the provider did not ensure staff used a range of appropriate ways and/or equipment to support and maximise people’s independence and outcomes from care and treatment. Key workers regularly met with people so they could discuss their care needs and wishes. However, the records of these meetings lacked detail, and it was not clear how staff ensured people were able to communicate their wishes, goals, worries and any queries to staff. Within people’s records, staff did not record how they supported people to remain independent and/or identify and develop new skills.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.