Nomase Supported Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Staff maintained records of incidents that occurred during home visits, documenting what happened, who was involved, the type of incident, and the actions taken in response. This ensured that any concerns arising in people’s own homes were recorded and acted upon.

The registered managers had effective oversight of all incidents and safety events, maintaining accountability and ensuring follow up. They reviewed incident reports, ensured actions were completed, and took appropriate steps such as raising safeguarding alerts, updating individuals’ risk assessments, and sharing learning with staff. Learning was routinely communicated through handovers, supervisions, and team meetings. One staff member told us, “The managers keep staff up to date with what has happened. We also have an application on our phones where we can read about updates and any changes or risks. And they also talk about incidents during team meetings.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Registered managers assessed people’s needs before care began to confirm the service could safely meet them, taking into account staff skills, training and the scope of the homecare provision. They ensured that appropriate equipment was available and used safely during home visits, such as hoists or mobility aids, and that staff were trained to use this equipment correctly. Where appropriate, managers involved people and their relatives in planning and reviewing care. One relative told us, “They involved me in planning. They know I live in the house.”

The service maintained good communication with families and external professionals, ensuring everyone involved in the person’s care had up to date information to support safety and wellbeing.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People told us they felt safe receiving care. One person said, “I am definitely safe with them.”

Staff understood the service’s safeguarding procedures and had completed training in how to recognise and report abuse. They were confident in escalating concerns when needed. One staff member told us, “If I suspect abuse, I will instantly report it… If they have not taken action, I will go to the director.”

Registered managers were clear about their responsibilities, investigating concerns, liaising with the local authority safeguarding team and notifying CQC as required.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Assessments looked at each person’s mental and physical health needs, communication, personal care, mobility, moving and handling how safely they could manage daily living tasks at home. People told us they felt safe with staff support. One person said, “I’m safe. They help me to move with the hoist. They know what they are doing so I feel safe. They explain to me what they are doing.” A relative added, “My loved one has a hoist. I feel that the staff have been trained on how to use it, so they are safe.”

Risk management plans were in place to guide staff in supporting people safely. This included support for individuals at risk of developing pressure sores and detailed moving and handling plans. Staff told us they had completed moving and handling training and used equipment safely.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Staff carried out risk assessments of people’s home environments to ensure safety for both individuals and staff delivering care. These assessments considered factors such as, fire and electrical hazards, and the equipment used in providing care. Care plans reminded staff to conduct a visual check of the environment and equipment at the beginning of each visit and to report any concerns promptly.

The service kept detailed records of maintenance and safety checks on equipment used in people’s care, including moving and handling devices and transfer aids. This process helped minimise the risk of harm arising from faulty or unsafe equipment.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

People’s care was planned according to their assessed needs, and both people and their relatives confirmed that the care provided matched what had been agreed. One relative told us, “[Loved one] has 2 regular carers who support them. They need two staff because of their needs. The carers are always there for them, and they know them so well.” Another relative mentioned, “They turn up on time. If they are running late they let her know. As far as I am aware they stay the full time.”

A staff rota was in place which outlined which carers were allocated to each visit, and staff told us they knew their schedules in advance. The registered managers explained they covered any shortfalls by offering overtime to staff, who were usually happy to help to maintain continuity.

The service ensured that people were supported by staff who were safe and suitable to work in homecare. Recruitment records showed robust pre employment checks were completed, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, verified references, exploration of employment history and checks on the right to work and proof of address. Staff received appropriate training, regular supervisions and annual appraisals to ensure they remained effective in their roles. A professional commented, “The staff demonstrate appropriate experience and knowledge to deliver effective care.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Staff had completed infection control training and demonstrated a good understanding of the procedures needed to prevent and minimise the risk of infection during home visits. They told us they were supplied with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) and used it correctly whenever required. Care plans also highlighted when PPE must be worn, such as during personal care or when handling bodily fluids. One relative commented, “They take out the bin and make sure the place is clean.”

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Care plans clearly outlined the level of support each person required to manage their medicines and specified who was responsible for each part of the process. One relative told us, “I order the medications and staff always administer them.”

Training records showed staff had received appropriate medicines training, and their competency had been assessed before supporting people in their homes. Staff we spoke with were able to explain how they managed medicines safely in line with organisational procedures, including safe storage, administration, recording and disposal.

Our review of Medicine Administration Records (MAR) found they were fully completed with no gaps. For people prescribed PRN (as needed) medicines, clear protocols were in place to guide staff on when PRN should be administered and the steps to take before doing so.