NCC Swift Response

During this inspection, we looked at the people who used the service in the 24-hour period of our site visit. All required one off interventions with none requiring more that one visit. Not everyone who used the service in this period 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 benefitted from receiving a service delivered by dedicated, professional and skilled staff who were committed to providing the best service they could. They demonstrated knowledge and passion and were supportive of each other and the service. There was an open, accommodating culture that strived to improve the service people received. Staff received regular support, training and opportunities to attend meetings which aided their development, knowledge and confidence.

Staff had been safely recruited and there were enough to meet people's needs in a person-centred manner. There were no time limits placed on how long staff could stay with people when providing them with support and this ensured people received an unhurried, dedicated service that met their urgent, unplanned and immediate needs. Staff assisted people with personal care, after a fall, medicines administration and meeting nutritional needs as required. This included when people were at the end of their lives.

Relevant information was taken at the point of referral and risks assessed as much as possible. However, staff were responsible for continuing to risk assess when making a visit and they demonstrated they were adept at doing so. Staff had received training in safeguarding people and were knowledgeable in this area. Any concerns had been referred to the local authority as required. Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed for trends to help prevent reoccurrence. Staff had received training in medicines administration and although training in infection prevention and control had expired for most staff, our evidence showed good practice was adopted.

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. People who used the service told us staff were considerate, kind and patient and were complimentary about the service they provided. They told us they felt safe with staff and that they were appreciative of the service at a time when they needed help urgently. People told us staff maintained their dignity and made them feel comfortable, respected and listened to.

Although no one we spoke with had the need to raise any concerns, they knew how to should the need arise. The provider had a complaints policy in place and the registered manager put emphasis on using complaints as opportunities for learning and improving the service. Audits were in place to ensure the quality of the service and strong partnership working was in place to ensure people received continuity in their care.

The service had received many compliments and the people we spoke with who used the service agreed the quality of the service was very good. One service user's relative said, "It's an extremely good service" whilst another told us, "[NCC Swift Response] is an amazing service."