Archived: Kitec Supported Living

Updated 30 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place between 5 and 14 July 2017. We gave 48 hours’ notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure that there would be someone in the office to support the inspection process. The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed this and other information we held about the service including notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us.

During the visit to the provider’s office on 5 July 2017, we spoke with registered manager, who is also the provider of the service. We also spoke with the administrator. We looked at the care records for four people who used the service. We also looked at the recruitment and training records for the four care staff employed by the service. We reviewed information on how medicines and complaints were being managed, and how the quality of the service was assessed and monitored. Following the visit to the office, we spoke with three people who used the service, two relatives and three care staff by telephone.

Updated 30 August 2017

This announced inspection was carried out between 5 and 14 July 2017. The service provides domiciliary care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, six people were being supported with their personal care by the service.

The service had a registered manager, who was also the provider. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Although the provider completed regular audits, they did not have robust systems to drive continual and sustained improvements. The provider worked closely with people, their relatives and staff to ensure that the service provided appropriately met people’s needs. They also promoted a caring and inclusive culture within the service.

People were safe because the provider had effective systems to keep them safe, and staff had been trained on how to safeguard people. There were risk assessments in place so that staff knew how to support people safely. People had been supported safely to take their medicines. The provider had effective staff recruitment processes in place and there was sufficient numbers of staff to support people safely.

Staff received training, support and supervision that enabled them to provide appropriate care to people who used the service. People were able to provide verbal consent to their care and support, and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being met. Where required, people had been appropriately supported to have enough to eat and drink, and to access health services.

Staff were kind and caring towards people they supported. They treated people with respect and supported them to maintain their independence as much as possible. People were happy with how their care was being provided, and they valued the support they received from staff and the registered manager.

People’s needs had been assessed before they were supported by the service. Care plans took account of their individual needs, choices, and information received during assessments. Staff were responsive to people’s needs and were working closely with people’s relatives to ensure that the support they provided was appropriate. The provider had a system to manage people’s complaints and concerns, and there had been no concerns raised about the quality of the service.