NAViGO Health and Social Care CIC

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has remained outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

We observed staff treat patients with exceptional compassion and kindness. Staff demonstrated empathy, respect and protected patients’ dignity at all times. Staff understood the individual needs of patients and supported them in a way they felt safe and reassured. Staff knew how to de-escalate distressed patients and did this exceptionally well. Staff involved patients in care planning and risk assessment and actively sought their feedback on the quality of care provided from patients and carers. Staff informed and involved families and carers throughout the admission process.

This service scored 90 (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 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity and supporting them with day to day care. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect and feedback corroborated this. Staff surveys reflected these values towards patients, families and each other.

We observed numerous interactions between staff and patients across the three wards. Staff attitudes and behaviours when interacting with patients showed that they were discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it. We completed 3 structured observations and recorded warm, positive interactions between staff and patients. Staff were able to identify where patients needs would be best met and ensured patients and carers were supported through transfers between the three wards or discharge to a care placement. Staff supported patients to attend appointments for physical health where needed.

Staff ensured patients who did not have family had access to clean, appropriate clothing and the service had a clothes bank based at Tee’s House. There was a large range of male and female clothing, available for patients to pick out items they liked to keep. These clothes were donated by carers, staff and the wider public. The service also provided space for patients who practiced religion to use as a prayer room, ensuring cultural and religious items where available where needed.

Staff felt confident in raising any concerns regarding disrespectful or discriminatory behaviour towards patients and identified how they would safeguard patients. Staff identified they did not fear retribution and always had access to a freedom to speak up guardian.

Carers we spoke with told us “It makes me feel at ease that my family member is being cared for here’ and “I can speak to anyone- all the staff will help’. One carer reported that a patient received good end of life care, the staff made sure she wascomfortable andbought a big chair for herto help with her comfort. Feedback around staff’s behaviour and approach was overwhelmingly positive.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The service took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service made adjustments for disabled patients and ensured patients had access to the equipment that they needed. There was disabled access in and outside of the three sites and gardens were wheelchair accessible. Tee’s House activity floor had disabled access meeting patients’ mobility needs. Rooms were spacious and bathrooms accommodated access needs. The wards had purchased high level therapy baths, which ensured people could enter with ease.

Carers and patients report feeling listened to and respected, with one carer commenting: “The staff are doing a good job” and “Best place Dad has been so far.” Carers told us that staff provided individualised, compassionate care, including thoughtful gestures such as offering pamper sessions when patients decline baths. A carer also praised “the excellent end-of-life care”, noting staff ensured comfort and provided all necessary equipment.

Staff ensured that patients and carers could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights, and how to complain. There were posters around the ward which explained how people could raise concerns or complaints. Patients and families could raise complaints through formal or informal channels.

The information provided was in a form accessible to the particular patient group and welcome packs were given to both patients and family members at admission. These were detailed information packs about admission, care plan meetings, the ward team, the bedroom and facilities, what people could and couldn’t bring, medication, protected mealtimes, information on use of force and cultural awareness and inclusion. The document also explained what happens at discharge, had information specific to carers and available independent support.

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 created collaborative, individualised and focused care plans for patients, which outlined ways to maximise independence, assist with choice, and how staff could support them to maintain as much independence as possible. Meeting minutes evidenced that staff made all attempts to engage patients and carers in discussion about their care to ensure their voice was heard. Patients and carers were offered and encouraged to provide feedback and share their views on their support and treatment. Family members we spoke with felt included and listened to during the meetings that they attended a carer told us “There’s always good communication and regular updates, phone calls from the service to update about patient’s care”.

There were information leaflets throughout the wards which identified what was happening in the service, networks, therapy sessions and activities available, groups that had planned activities in the community, advocacy services and local services in the area relevant to recovery. Navigo produced their own magazine which contained much of this information for patients, carers and the community.

We spoke with 6 family members who all felt that the support and treatment received ensured their loved ones maintained their independence as much as possible and had a voice within their care and treatment.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service was exceptional in how they 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 were aware of and dealt with any specific risk issues, such as falls or pressure ulcers and care planned for these accordingly. We saw evidence of responsive action taken due to increased falls where thorough reviews determined excess furniture increased risk. Furniture was removed and falls incidents had decreased.

Risk assessments that were reviewed were dynamic and live, with regular updates, review dates and evidence of discussion within the wider MDT. Staff kept people safe through different levels of observation in response to increased risk. The service was responsive in accessing increased staff numbers through the older persons bank system to meet needs and keep people safe.

Staff were highly skilled in de-escalation and knowledgeable of how to support distressed patients which was evident within the low use of restraint, rapid tranquilisation and our observations of practice. For Jane Lewington Suite there were no instances of rapid tranquilisation, for Janine Smith Suite there were 5 incidents, however one related to the patient accepting PRN medication and only 4 were rapid tranquilisation. All the incident reports make reference to violence and aggression and the declining of oral medication before Rapid tranquillisation as used, and for Konar there were 9 instances reported in a 12-month period. Evidence showed that de-escalation was attempted prior to any use of restraint.

The service learned from incidents, discussed these at both patient safety and quality network meetings and took action to prevent further instances or to decrease specific risks.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care. We spoke with 14 members of staff, ranging across all levels. All staff that we spoke with felt respected, supported and valued within the service. Length of employment and exceptionally low turnover reflected this. Staff told us they felt proud to work within the organisation and service, giving praise to the learning and development opportunities presented to them.

The service encouraged staff progression and offered preceptorships to staff. Theprogrammecommencedin October 2023 and has the Gold Interim Quality Mark awarded by the National Preceptorship Team. Theprogrammesupports newly registered nurses or individuals who wouldbenefitfromadditionalsupport following a changeofworkplace, competency issues or return to nursing.

The service’s staff sickness and absence were less than that compared to the average NHS trust. AsofAugust 2025, sickness across all olderpeoplesserviceswas2.14%compared to an NHS average of 4.7% (May 2025). Long term sicknesshad decreased and was at its lowest for the last 12 months. There were no shifts that were unable to be covered.

We spoke to one member of staff who had completed Navigo’s international nurse recruitment programme and now excels as senior operational manager for the acute older people’s services. The praise towards the service was extremely positive and the member of staff told us they received a structured week-long OSCE (Objective Structured Clinical Examination) preparation programme at The Royal Marsden Hospital, full paid study days, and Navigo fully funded the OSCE examination as well as transportation to and from the local University.

Staff we spoke with told us they felt extremely valued, leaders always gave praise and genuinely cared about their wellbeing. Staff also told us they were supported with specialist interests and training opportunities linked to these. The staff across the older persons services were extremely positive about their workplace and felt they could progress within their roles. Staff felt that supervisions and appraisals were a positive process.

Staff recognition occurred in many forms, including a weekly Friday Shout Out email from Navigo Communications team, where staff of all levels express heartfelt and humorous gratitude to their colleagues. Monthly Quality and Learning networks also included “successes” as a standing item, where staff express their triumphs and gratitude to their colleagues and teams. These regular expressions of gratitude and recognition built morale and publicly acknowledged the hard work of staff.