GoodOaks Homecare - Isle of Wight

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first inspection for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 85 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Family members repeatedly described staff as “brilliant,” “very gentle,” and “so easy going,” showing consistently caring and respectful interactions. People said staff supported them sensitively, including “coaxing” them with personal care in a way that preserved independence and reduced anxiety. Relatives also reported that live‑in support “made such a big difference,” with people becoming less anxious due to care staff attentive, compassionate approach.

Family members described care staff supporting advance wishes and helping people take part in significant events, such as attending a loved one’s funeral with staff providing full emotional and practical support. People benefited from continuity of care staff, which strengthened trust, with a relative saying their family member “trusted” staff and even used affectionate nicknames for their care staff. All feedback showed consistently high‑quality, warm and emotionally attuned care delivered across multiple staff and settings.

External professionals all told us they would be happy for a family member to receive care from GoodOaks Homecare - Isle of Wight informing us that people told them they were happy with the care they received.

The provider treated people as individuals and was exceptional in making sure care, support and treatment reflected their needs, preferences, histories and routines. Families described staff using personalised approaches, such as adapting care to mood, recognising what people could do independently and recording “mood of the day” to tailor support.

Care records included information about people’s life history and what was important to them. This meant care staff could provide care around individual people’s needs and wishes even when they were unable to fully communicate these to care staff. Care notes showed staff responded appropriately when people’s needs changed contacting relevant external professionals or family members.

The provider organised a variety of person‑centred activities such as coffee mornings, festive outings, home‑baked treats, social groups, walks, and church visits illustrating a warm, community‑focused approach where staff went above and beyond to create joyful, personalised experiences for people. Together, this evidence demonstrates a well‑led, compassionate service committed to enhancing the wellbeing of the people it supports.

External professionals told us communication with staff was good and that the service provided safe and supportive care for people with complex needs. They said staff worked well with other teams, showing respect and professionalism in joint visits, and sought specialist advice when needed. Feedback from all professionals contacted was positive, reinforcing the strong and person‑centred approach described by people and families.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so they knew their rights and had choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing. Family members said staff encouraged independence. For example, a family member told us their relative was supported to say what they “could and could not do”, helping maintain autonomy. People and relatives also told us staff offered choices around routines, food and personal care, with care staff preparing meals tailored to individual needs and prompting sufficient drinks sensitively. Staff described how they adapted support, such as allowing extra time when people needed reassurance or had additional communication needs. Overall, evidence showed consistently respectful and choice‑led practice.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes, and staff responded to people’s needs in the moment to minimise discomfort or distress. Family members said staff checked whether anything else was needed before leaving visits and adjusted support when situations changed, such as ensuring mobile phones were charged, food expiry dates or applying creams to maintain skin integrity. Staff and families described how care staff adapted visit lengths when needed, including staying longer following falls or when weather conditions caused delays, ensuring people were not left at risk. The service also provided out‑of‑hours support, with senior staff available at all times for urgent concerns.

The provider cared about and promoted staff wellbeing and supported staff to deliver person‑centred care. Many staff told us they felt valued, supported and listened to, with some describing managers as “brilliant” and noting how support improved their self‑confidence. Office staff praised the culture, saying the registered manager was “amazing,” “very hard working,” and fostered a close‑knit, supportive environment for staff.Staff received recognition through vouchers for length of service or employee of the month, festive events and positive feedback from managers, which contributed to a sense of appreciation.