Kate's Home Nursing

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

We looked for evidence that people were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that people’s privacy and dignity was respected, that they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We also looked for evidence that every effort was made to take people’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating remains good. This meant people felt well-supported, cared for and treated with dignity and respect.

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.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff attitudes and behaviours when interacting with patients were discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it.

Staff supported patients and their families to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition where this was appropriate. Patients felt staff treated them with kindness and compassion and supported them with empathy and understanding. Relatives who had experienced a bereavement described how staff supported them at a difficult time and helped them through the process with professionalism and care.

Staff said they could raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients or staff without fear of reprisal. Staff described how they discussed any concerns raised to prevent them escalating and ensure patients received safe and compassionate care.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff took a full history of patient preferences including culture, communication needs and made adjustments where needed. Staff provided care in patient’s own homes and were part of a muti-disciplinary team which provided care to meet individual needs. Specialist services provided guidance for nursing staff for example, when supporting patients with neurological conditions. Staff told us how this had helped them care for patients such as those with motor neurone disease, more effectively.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff took account of patient preferences of how much independence they would like during their care. Some patients were living with conditions which had periods of deterioration and improvement. Kate’s Home Nursing staff provided support at these times until patients felt able to cope. Other patients wanted support to improve their last days or weeks of their life but stay in their own home. Staff responded promptly to help patients remain in their homes.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff identified and responded to changing risks for patients such as falls, pressure ulcers, increasing pain and confusion. Staff documented updated risks and communicated with local community services to ensure relevant equipment was available to support patients safely. This included equipment to help patien ts move in the bed or around their home if more mobile.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued by their managers. Staff were proud to work as part of Kate’s Home Nursing team and described it as being part of a family. Annual appraisals included conversations about career development and staff were supported to access training to achieve their aims. Mandatory training and additional training was funded by the service.

Staff were supported to stay healthy and any risks to staff health was discussed confidentially and actions take to reduce recurrence where possible. Managers reviewed policies regarding moving and handling patients. This promoted liaison with community services to make sure equipment for moving and handling was readily available.