Aura Supported Living Ltd Also known as Head Office

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (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 promoted a proactive and positive learning culture that was based on openness, honesty and continuous improvement. Staff were encouraged to raise concerns about safety and felt confident these would be listened to. Regular team meetings provided opportunities to discuss learning, reflect on experiences and share improvements across the service. Staff were actively encouraged to contribute ideas and suggestions, which helped foster a culture of continuous learning and development. This approach supported the ongoing delivery of safe, effective and person-centred care.

The provider worked effectively with people, their relatives and healthcare professionals to help ensure safe systems of care and continuity of support. Staff understood people's individual health needs and recognised when additional support or intervention was required. Where appropriate, staff communicated concerns promptly to family members, enabling timely access to healthcare services. One relative told us, "Staff are very good at letting me know if there is a concern with [Name] so I can call the GP if needed." This demonstrated staff had a good understanding of people's needs and the support arrangements in place, working collaboratively with relatives and healthcare partners to help maintain people's health, safety and wellbeing.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s personalised risks and safeguarding needs. Staff were able to clearly describe the specific vulnerabilities of each person they supported, including risks related to communication, health conditions, behaviour, and social situations. This demonstrated that they knew people well and were confident in recognising even subtle changes that might indicate increased risk.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. Where people receive support in their own homes, this can be done through The Court of Protection which is defined as part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed deprivation of liberty within the service. We found that the principles of the MCA were being met and issues were identified quickly. Staff followed the organisation’s procedures correctly and informed the Registered Manager without delay. The Registered Manager demonstrated strong oversight of safeguarding. They assessed concerns promptly, took proportionate action based on level of risk, and made timely referrals to the relevant external agencies, including the local authority safeguarding team, health professionals, and the Care Quality Commission. Lessons learned were shared with staff, which strengthened the service’s safeguarding culture.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks; however, records did not always demonstrate this consistently. For example, we identified a risk assessment that had not been reviewed for over 12 months, which meant documentation was not always reflective of current oversight arrangements. This limited assurance that risks were being formally reviewed and updated in a timely manner. Despite this, people told us staff had a good understanding of their individual needs and the risks associated with their care. Feedback from people was positive, with one person saying, "The carers are excellent, they know me so well and just get on with everything, I don't need to tell them what to do and I always feel safe." This demonstrated that, although improvements were needed to ensure records remained up to date, staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and supported them in a way that promoted their safety and wellbeing.

The provider took appropriate steps to identify and control potential risks within people's care environments and ensured the home setting supported the delivery of safe care. Care plans contained clear and personalised guidance for staff on how to respond in emergency situations within people's homes. This included information on evacuation procedures and the location of key utilities and safety systems, such as gas and water shut-off points and fuse boxes. These measures helped to ensure staff could respond promptly and effectively in the event of an emergency, supporting people's safety and wellbeing.

The provider had systems in place to ensure staff were recruited safely. Appropriate pre-employment checks were completed before staff started work, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, employment history verification and references. These processes helped ensure suitable staff were employed to support people safely.

People told us they were supported by a small, consistent team of staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs and preferences. This continuity of care helped people feel comfortable, safe and well supported.

Staff received ongoing training and development to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. This included regular supervision, competency assessments and opportunities to discuss their learning and professional development. Staff spoke positively about the support they received. One staff member told us, "I believe that the training I received has helped me become the support worker I am today, had it not been for the necessary training I would not be where I am and as confident as I am."

Staff also told us there were enough staff deployed to meet people's needs safely. One staff member said, "The rotas are manageable, and I have felt that there has been enough staff to support people appropriately. From my own experience, the service seems focused on making sure people's needs are met, and I have not had concerns about staffing levels affecting care delivery." This feedback, alongside our review of staffing arrangements, demonstrated the provider was committed to maintaining safe staffing levels and supporting staff to deliver quality care.

People were protected from the risk of infection through effective systems and clear guidance for staff. The provider assessed and managed infection risks appropriately, which ensured safe care was delivered in people’s homes and that the spread of infection was minimised.

Care plans contained clear, individualised guidance for staff on infection prevention and control practices. This included detailed instructions on the correct use of personal protective equipment (PPE), specifying when items such as gloves and aprons should be used and what equipment was appropriate for each person’s needs. This supported staff to follow safe practices consistently.

Staff competence was regularly monitored to ensure infection control procedures were understood and followed in practice. Observations, spot checks and supervision were used to reinforce good practice and address any issues promptly, which helped to maintain high standards of hygiene and safety.

Not everyone who used Aura Supported Living required support with their medicines. However, where people did receive assistance, the provider had systems in place to ensure medicines and treatments were managed safely and in line with people's needs, capacities and preferences. People were involved in planning their support, including discussions about any changes to their medicines or treatment arrangements.

Staff responsible for administering medicines had received appropriate training and understood their responsibilities. One staff member told us, "I administer medication as part of my role, and I have received the relevant training to do so. I understand the importance of following medication procedures carefully, recording everything accurately, and escalating any concerns or errors immediately in line with service policy."

We reviewed medicine administration records (MARs) and found these had been completed accurately by staff. The manager carried out regular monthly audits of medicines records to help identify any errors, omissions or emerging risks and ensure prompt action was taken where required. These arrangements supported the safe management of medicines and helped to promote positive outcomes for people using the service.