Kingsley Court

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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

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.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

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.
The environment was generally safe, clean and well maintained. While systems were in place to identify and manage environmental risks, these were not always fully effective. We identified areas where potential risks had not been fully assessed. Management acted promptly to address the issues raised during the assessment, and we found no evidence that people had been adversely affected at the time.
 

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

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.

The provider did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff did not always involve people in planning.
People received their medicines safely and as prescribed. However, some areas of medicines management required improvement. During the assessment, we identified issues relating to the dating of medicines and documentation to support the safe administration of medicines prescribed on an 'as required' basis (PRN). Although these concerns had not impacted people's care, they presented a risk that medicines may not always be managed consistently. Management responded promptly to our feedback, taking immediate action to address the issues identified.