Loading
Date of assessment: 24 February to 30 March 2026. Site visits to the providers registered office address were carried out on 24 February, 4 and 30 March 2026. Merseycare Julie Ann Limited is a domiciliary care service registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of our assessment, 581 people received support with personal care. We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed autistic people and people with a learning disability respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. We found the service was meeting the principles outlined in this guidance. This provider has been in Special Measures since 22 August 2025. The provider demonstrated improvements that have been made. The provider is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this provider is no longer in Special Measures. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. Improvements were found and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations. The provider demonstrated a clear commitment to continuous improvement and had worked hard to address shortfalls found at our last assessment. Governance and oversight of all areas of care provision had improved significantly. Strengthened auditing systems had led to improved quality and safety in areas such as people’s care calls, care reviews and care planning. However, some further improvement was needed to ensure all audits and checks were effective at identifying and addressing concerns in areas such as medicines management, risk assessments and aspects of care planning. The provider was responsive to our feedback in relation to the shortfalls found and took immediate action to ensure the safety and wellbeing of the people they support.
npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-128022770.Date of assessment – 31 March to 10 April 2025. This was an unannounced assessment. Two site visits were conducted on the 31 and 2 April 2025. The assessment concluded on the 10 April 2025. Merseycare Julie Ann Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing support to people living in their own home. CQC only inspects where people receive the regulated activity personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.At the time of our assessment, 450 were in receipt of the personal care regulated by CQC. Some people using the service lived with autism or a learning disability. Although this service is not registered as a specialist service, we still assessed the service against ‘Right Culture, right care, right support’ guidance. This was to check if the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability or autism respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. This was a responsive assessment based on intelligence CQC held about the service and potential risk. During the assessment, 2 regulatory breaches were found in respect of safe care and treatment and good governance. People’s needs and risks were not properly assessed. Staff lacked accurate and sufficient information on how to mitigate risks and provide safe care. People’s care did not always adhere to best practice guidance and people’s records showed gaps in the care they received. People’s visits were not consistently scheduled or delivered. The provider had not ensured the deployment of staff maximised positive outcomes. Data showed a significant number of people’s visits were later or earlier than scheduled, which meant people had little assurance or certainty as to when their support would be provided. Governance arrangements to monitor the quality and safety of the service were not robust. The provider and management team did not have effective oversight of the service to ensure staff supported people safely, and in a way that met their needs. People’s preferences in how they would like their support to be provided was respected and care plans outlined the tasks people could do independently and what they needed help with. Where there were concerns about people’s capacity to make decisions, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had been followed to ensure consent was legally obtained. Staff were recruited safely and had access to an appropriate induction and training. Some staff training needed to be refreshed but overall staff felt well trained and supported by the management team. The findings of the assessment were discussed with the management team. They were not always receptive to the feedback given, which raised concerns over the provider’s ability to listen, learn and improve the service. The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’. The service has been placed in ‘special measures’. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.
npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-128022770.Merseycare Julie Ann Limited achieved an overall rating of Good across all five key questions at its December 2017 inspection, demonstrating significant improvement since a Requires Improvement rating in October 2016 including resolution of a prior breach of Regulation 12. Minor areas for attention included a small number of overdue staff supervisions and isolated gaps in medication administration record spot-check quality, neither of which compromised people's safety.
Merseycare Julie Ann Limited was rated Requires Improvement overall following an unannounced inspection in October–November 2016, with a breach of Regulation 12 identified due to inadequate and conflicting risk management documentation. Audit systems failed to detect care plan deficiencies, supervision was inconsistent, and CQC death notifications had not been submitted, though caring practice was rated Good with high staff morale and positive service user feedback.