Archived: Kayla Supported Living Ltd

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

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question Inadequate. At this assessment the rating has remained inadequate. This meant people were not safe and were at risk of avoidable harm.

The service continued to be in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment, the ways people’s medicines were managed and safe recruitment, training and support of staff.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

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.

The provider did not have a proactive and positive culture of safety based on openness and honesty. Lessons were not learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

As a result of our feedback at the previous inspection, the provider had developed an accident form to be used in preference to the one provided in the electronic care record system and a policy for managing accidents and incidents policy had been put in place. However, we did not see any evidence of the standardised post‑fall observation checklist the provider had told us they would develop.

The managing accidents and incidents policy needed further detail to describe how accidents and incidents would be analysed so that learning could be taken from them. We did not see any evidence of analysis of a previously recorded fall and no record had been made of a conversation with the staff member involved.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

We could not make a judgement as the provider had not completed any assessments of people’s needs due to the suspension of their regulated activity. Therefore, there was not enough evidence for us to rate this quality statement.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

The provider did not always work well with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and how to achieve that.

At our last assessment neither the provider nor the staff member could demonstrate a level of understanding of safeguarding processes that would keep people safe. Since then, the provider and staff member had completed some on-line safeguarding training. However, from conversation with the staff member, we could not be fully assured of their understanding of their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. and there was no evidence that had been checked by the provider.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

We could not make a judgement as there was not enough evidence for us to rate this quality statement.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. They did not always make sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

At our last assessment we found the provider had not completed risk assessments relating to the environments in which care would be delivered. We said this was important to promote the safety of people and staff and allow them to live as safely and independently as possible in their own homes. Following our visit to the service, the provider developed and shared with us newly created environmental risk assessments for both people.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

The provider did not always make sure staff received effective support, supervision and development.

Since our last assessment the provider and staff member had accessed some on-line training and further practical training was planned.

Recruitment records for the staff member were in place but records relating to supervision and support were not always completed.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

We could not make a judgement as there was not enough evidence for us to rate this quality statement.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.

The provider did not always make sure that systems to support safe administration of medicines were in place

The provider had introduced a number of systems to promote safe management of medicines such as guidance for staff, proposed audit schedules and staff had completed some online training. However, the medicines policy the provider had produced was relevant to a residential care home and not a domiciliary care agency. This lack of attention to detail meant staff were not protected by having safe and robust guidance for managing medicines.

Scores and ratings have not been changed for this assessment and are based on the previous inspection. This is because no regulated activity was being delivered at the time of this assessment.