House Cleaning Services · Moncks Corner, SC

Is Nana's General Services any good?

Our verdict: mixed — #50 of 50 house cleaning services, better than 0%. Customers single out its accountability and value; track record is where it trails.

👍 Strengths

Accountability — better than 87% of peers

👎 Watch-outs

Satisfaction — 13th percentile

Momentum — 13th percentile

Track record — 7th percentile

Price $$$: 8% above typical

Nana's General Services for general housekeeping

Clear ✕

2 customers reviewed a general housekeeping job here and rated it 5.00★. Most paid $250–300 (category typical: $164–$259).

All 2 Google reviews tagged “General housekeeping”

★★★★★ Sam · 5 months ago

I was very impressed with the deep clean service! The teammates who came by were professional and did an outstanding job!

Great priceGeneral housekeeping
★★★★★ Padma · a year ago

We hired Nana Services to clean our house. They sent Felipe and his wife to clean and they did an excellent job. I am greatly satisfied with the quality of the work they did. I highly recommend them and will use them again.

Paid $250–300Reasonable priceInterior & exterior window cleaningMoving-related cleaningGeneral housekeeping

Price

$$$$
$300+8% vs typical house cleaning services

Bar = middle half of what customers paid · gold mark = category median.

Questions about Nana's General Services

Is Nana's General Services good?

Yes by most measures: 4.9★ from 57 Google reviews and an Experts Score of 19/100 (grade F), #50 of 50 house cleaning services we track. 3.5% of reviews in the last two years were 1–2★ (category average 2.3%).

How much does Nana's General Services charge?

Customers reported a typical bill of $300 (middle half $213–$347), 8% above the house cleaning services median of $277.

What do customers hire Nana's General Services for?

Mostly deep clean (11), interior & exterior window cleaning (6), standard cleaning (5), moving-related cleaning (5).

Does the owner respond to complaints?

The owner replied to 100% of 1–3★ reviews (category: 74%).

Compare with