You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 12 May 2021

About the service

NR Care Head Office is a domiciliary care service. They provide personal care and support to people living in their own homes. Not everyone who used the service 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. At the time of our inspection the service was providing a regulated activity to 20 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People felt safe when staff supported them. Staff knew how to report concerns and keep people safe from harm.

Although staff supported people safely with their medicines, records were not always thorough. There was not always full guidance in place on how and when topical creams should be administered. Allergies were not always written on the Medicines Administration Records (MARs), which meant that unfamiliar staff may not always have this information immediately available when administering medicines. However, these risks were mitigated due to the person having a regular member of staff who knew them well, administering medicines.

Risks to people were planned for and there was guidance in place for staff to manage these.

Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff to cover people’s care visits.

Staff received training in areas relevant to their role, and where needed, related to specific people’s needs.

Staff used Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as required by current guidelines and followed good infection control practices to reduce the risk of the spread of infection, including COVID-19.

People’s needs had been assessed thoroughly before the service agreed to deliver care so they could ensure they could meet these needs. Care plans were person-centred, with guidance for staff on how to meet their needs, including physical and mental health, family lives and interests.

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.

Staff asked for consent before delivering care, and understood people’s needs around making decisions, but further work was required around care planning records relating to people’s mental capacity. We have made a recommendation in this area.

People were, in the main, supported by a consistent group of staff who knew them well. Staff supported people in a caring way and involved them in decisions relating to their care.

Staff were supported by the service, and felt involved. Quality assurance systems were in place which identified areas for improvement, which were then acted upon. The provider recognised areas where further work was still required and had made plans for ongoing improvements.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection and update:

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published January 2020) and there were two breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection areas



Updated 12 May 2021

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 12 May 2021

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 12 May 2021

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 12 May 2021

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.



Updated 12 May 2021

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.