Nash Homecare

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People's experience of using this service and what we found: People told us the care they received was invaluable and enabled them to remain both independent and maintain their dignity and respect. Staff had formed meaningful relationships with people which enhanced the care provided to them. Care was provided by a staff team who were enthusiastic and committed to providing exceptional care.

Staff knew people well and were instinctively able to provide care that was based on people's choices and preferences. People were valued and listened to by staff who involved them in developing their care. Where complaints were raised these were swiftly managed and responded to.

People told us the service was safe and they felt at ease with the care provided. Risks associated with providing care to people were identified and managed safely.

People received care at the time and length agreed and were not rushed. Where people had assistance with their medicines, they received them when required.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) measures were effectively operated to keep people safe during the COVID-19 pandemic.

People's needs were assessed before care was provided. People felt staff were trained and supported well and provided effective care. Where people required assistance with eating and drinking staff did so and sought support from healthcare professionals when needed.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Managers were aware of their responsibilities, were approachable, listened and acted. They had embedded and promoted an open and honest staff team culture to deliver personalised care to people. The staff team worked well within this culture and treated people equally well. Audits and governance systems were in place, although some further development was required around implementing improvements. People,

relatives and staff were fully involved in how the service was run and their voice was listened to and acted upon.