Nomase Supported Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

One person told us, “The care I have got is very good. They look after me well. They help me with whatever I need.” A relative added, “We have had them for a long time. It’s all going really well. They come four times a day. They help my loved one wash, dress, move, with medication and meals.”

Care plans were in place which set out each person’s needs and the support required. These plans were detailed, person centred and reflected people’s routines, preferences and any changes in their health or wellbeing. Daily care notes showed that staff followed these plans consistently, supporting people in line with their assessed needs.

Staff demonstrated understanding of how people’s needs changed over time and adapted their support accordingly. They promoted people’s independence, comfort and wellbeing by providing care that was flexible and responsive.

A health professional told us, “The service responds to individual needs promptly and tailors support to meet those needs effectively. They show a good understanding of the needs of those they support and respond appropriately, ensuring that care is person centred.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service worked closely with people and their relatives to ensure support reflected individual needs, preferences and circumstances. People told us they were cared for in the way they wanted, and relatives confirmed that staff routinely involved them and took their views into account.

One relative commented, “They always ask about me, how I am and how [my loved one] is doing because we all live in the same house.” Another relative told us, “They work with us and we share information with them so they know what is happening.”

This demonstrated a collaborative approach that helped staff tailor support and maintain an up to date understanding of each person’s care needs.

The service ensured people received consistent and familiar care. One relative told us, “[My loved one] gets the same carers in the week and different ones at the weekend, but they are all consistent. They know them well and trust them all.” Another relative mentioned, “All the weekday staff are the same and all the weekend staff are the same. They are all very consistent.”

This continuity helped build trusting relationships and supported people to feel safe and comfortable with the staff providing their care. Professionals also spoke positively about the provider’s proactive and collaborative approach.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Communication was assessed during care planning, including hearing, vision and speech needs. Where necessary, key documents, such as hospital passports and activity plans, were made available in large print, pictures and easy read formats. Staff were trained to use clear speech, gestures, flashcards and signs to support understanding. The provider also confirmed information could be provided in different languages when needed.

Care plans demonstrated this personalised approach. For example, one person who spoke another language as their first language and had a mild speech impairment was supported through simple language, slow speech, gestures and maintaining eye contact, giving them time to respond. This helped the person express their choices confidently and take an active part in their care.

The provider confirmed that information could also be made available in different languages and formats if required.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People and their relatives told us staff involved them in the care of their loved ones.

The provider had a complaints policy and procedure that people and their relatives were aware of. One person told us, “I’ve got no complaints about anything. I will speak to the registered manager if I have any concerns. They come around for spot checks.” A relative said, “I have never had to complain. There’s nothing to complain about. I can call the office at any time.”

Registered managers and the nominated individual understood their responsibilities in responding to complaints. They told us they would investigate any concerns raised and provide an appropriate and timely response.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Relatives told us communication with the office was straightforward and reliable. One relative said, “I can call them anytime. It’s easy to get through to the office. They have mobile phones too.” Another relative added, “It’s always easy to get through. They gave us a pack when we started, so I have all the numbers we can call.”

Care was planned around people’s assessed needs, and individuals confirmed staff worked collaboratively with them to meet those needs. Staff were flexible and adapted support when circumstances changed. For example, one relative told us staff “went above and beyond” to help when essential equipment became faulty, supporting the family to resolve the issue promptly.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People told us they felt heard and involved. One person said, “The staff are caring and I feel listened to. They always encourage me to be involved and to give my views.” This demonstrated a culture in which people’s voices influenced how their care was delivered.

The service provided regular opportunities for people and their relatives to share feedback, including through care reviews, surveys and spot checks. This helped the provider identify potential barriers, understand diverse experiences and ensure that support remained inclusive and person centred.

Staff told us they understood the importance of adapting care to address the needs of those who might be more vulnerable to inequality, such as people with communication needs, long term health conditions, or cultural requirements. The registered managers used feedback to improve care provided. Staff had completed training in equality and diversity which ensured staff had the information and confidence to support people safely and respectfully.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Where individuals felt comfortable, their end of life wishes were discussed and recorded as part of their care planning. Registered managers explained that not everyone was ready to explore this area, and discussions were approached sensitively and reviewed over time.

They also confirmed that if a person required end of life care, the service would work closely with them, their relatives and relevant health professionals to ensure their physical, emotional and spiritual needs were met and that care remained consistent with their wishes.