Kitec Supported Living

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

As part of this assessment, we looked at 3 quality statements for the key question of safe. These were, safeguarding, involving people to manage risks and safe and effective staffing. People told us they felt safe, and their care was delivered safely. People's risk of experiencing avoidable harm were reduced by the provider's risk assessments and risk management plans. There were enough skilled and competent staff to ensure they could safely support people and staff were recruited safely.

This service scored 28 (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 Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Staff knew how to take action to minimise the risks of avoidable harm to people and were passionate about ensuring people were safe from harm. One staff member commented, “[Person] is at risk of falls. I take great care to make sure they don’t have falls and stay with them. I'm proud to say their falls have reduced.”

People told us they felt safe. A relative told us, “I have confidence in the carers ability to keep [family member] safe.”

The provider had systems and processes to respond and manage safeguarding incidents and concerns. Staff had received training to protect people from avoidable harm and understood how to report any concerns. Staff were aware of the providers safeguarding or whistleblowing procedures and the registered manager understood their responsibility to report safeguarding concerns.

Staff were aware of people’s risk assessments and felt they could confidently support people safely. One staff member said, “I know the risks to [person] regarding falls. I follow the risk assessment and take care to make sure they stay safe.”

Risks were assessed, monitored, and managed. Care plans and risks assessments were in place and had been reviewed regularly or when there were changes. For example, people's specific needs around their mobility needs.

People were protected against the risk of avoidable harm. A relative told us, “[Family member] is prone to falls. The carers are very aware of the risks to [family member] and there has been a reduction in the number of falls.”

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Staff rotas showed that sufficient numbers of staff were consistently deployed to fully meet people’s needs. The provider followed robust recruitment procedures to ensure people were protected from staff that may not be fit to support them. The registered manager told us they tried to match people with similar characters, interests, age ranges and skills set.

There were sufficient staff to keep people safe. A relative commented, “[Family member] has 1 -1 care which meets their needs. The staff are competent and know how to support [family member].”

Staff expressed satisfaction regarding staffing levels. One staff member told us, "We have enough staff to meet [persons] needs.” Another member of staff commented, “The staffing provides consistency which is important to [person]."

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.