Nobilis Care Southampton

The inspection was prompted in part by notifications of concerns raised when the provider supported people with catheter care. We found following professional feedback, care planning and staff training for catheter care were improved.

Staff delivered person-centred care that promoted people’s independence, dignity, and wellbeing. People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to identify and work towards their goals. These included remaining independent at home, regaining skills, and recovering after illness or hospital stays. Staff built positive relationships with people, including those initially reluctant to engage. This helped balance managing risks to safety and wellbeing with people’s right to control how their care was organised and delivered.

The provider was responsive to people’s changing needs and worked effectively with external professionals and commissioners to adjust care packages when required. We received positive feedback from health and social care partners, who told us the provider worked proactively to monitor people’s conditions and report concerns promptly. This helped ensure people had the right level of support in place.

The provider had effective governance systems to monitor quality and safety. This included proactive oversight of care delivery through electronic systems, alongside more reflective reviews of key areas. Systems were in place to gather feedback, manage complaints, and learn from concerns, with evidence this was used to drive improvement.

Systems specific to community-based care helped reduce risks to people and staff, including business continuity plans, non-entry policies, lone working arrangements, and out-of-hours senior support. These measures helped keep people and staff safe.

However, improvements were needed in relation to the consistency of care call times, communication about changes, and aspects of staff training and care planning for specific medical conditions. The registered manager had begun taking action to address these issues, ensuring risks to people were minimised and introducing measures to improve scheduling and communication. This demonstrated a proactive and open approach to feedback, helping drive improvements to the quality of the service.

The service was registered for use by autistic people or people with a learning disability. At the time of the assessment, the service was not supporting any autistic people or people with a learning disability. The registered manager told us there were currently no plans to provide care for this service user group.