Rosebank

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We assessed 7 quality statements in the responsive key question and found areas of good practice. Our rating for this key question is good. People’s care plans demonstrated people were at the centre of their care and support. People were listened to and empowered to make decisions about their care and support and to express their wishes and preferences. People’s needs were understood and met by staff to help ensure people received continuity of care. Information was provided to people in a way in which they understood, and in line with the Accessible information standard.

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.

People told us they had a care plan which accurately reflected their needs, and that they were involved in the development and reviewing of their care plan. People confirmed they talked about their care plan with staff, and they were happy with it.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people were fully involved with their care planning and where appropriate, any relatives or significant others. For people who did not have any significant others, the provider supported people to use a suitable advocate to help ensure their wishes were put across. People’s care plans reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. The registered manager explained how people had a ‘key worker’ in place. This meant people were supported by staff who were familiar with their needs and preferences. Staff told us they had access to people's care plans and that they were regularly reviewed and updated when required. Staff told us they found care plans were informative and provided clear guidance on how to provide people with the care and support they needed. Staff also told us how they directly involved people in any reviews or discussions about their care plan.

Staff were observed treating people as individuals, they engaged people in activities and conversations which showed they knew people well. People appeared to be relaxed and at ease in the presence of staff.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and support. They told us staff supported them to access other services as and when needed.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed people received a good continuity of care. The registered manager told us there was a joined-up approach to care from both internal and external services, and how the person’s own social worker was regularly consulted in reviews of their care. Staff told us they had developed good working relationships with other professionals that were involved in people’s care and support.

Feedback from external partners confirmed people received care and support which met their individual needs. One professional told us, “Staff ensured the many layers of complexity of our service users were met.”

Processes were in place to ensure when people’s care involved external services, it was delivered in a co-ordinated way which met their needs and preferences. In addition to having access to external professionals, people enjoyed access to in-house professionals such as psychologists and nurses. This meant people didn’t have to wait to receive the care they needed. The electronic care system enabled time responsive recording; this supported staff to document all interventions made to support tailor made care.

People told us they were provided with the information they needed about their care and support.

Staff and leaders confirmed people’s needs to have information in an accessible format was assessed and recorded. These needs were met and reviewed to support people’s care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard. The registered manager explained, “We can produce support plans in an easy read format, we use pictures and emojis to help the information to be understood by people.” Staff confirmed they supported people to access and understand information relevant to them.

Processes were in place to ensure people’s needs to receive information were met and reviewed to support their care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard. There was an accessible information procedure in place. Polices such as safeguarding and complaints were provided to people in formats which were accessible for them. If required, people were able to use alternative forms of communication in their care plans and risk assessments to ensure their understating, for example, by the use of pictorial information and emojis.

People said they would speak up if they had any concerns and were confident they would be listened to.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed they actively listened and involved people. They described how they communicated with people in a way they understood, and which was meaningful to them. The registered manager explained how they used surveys, reviews, mutual help meetings and talking boards as ways of obtaining people’s feedback. They also told us, “People will approach me if they have any issues.” Staff knew about the complaint's procedure. Staff told us they would take complaints seriously and follow the providers complaints procedure.

Processes were in place to ensure people’s voices were heard. As people were supported on a 1-1 staff ratio, there were opportunities for people to feedback to staff at any time. The management team also operated an open-door policy. Any concerns raised were treated with compassion and as an opportunity to learn.

People told us they received support to access all the care and support they needed.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed staff supported people to access services in a timely way. Although there was no one currently at the service who required specialist adaptations to the environment, the registered manager confirmed this was something that would be considered should the person require.

Feedback from partners confirmed people had free choice and access in accessing any external service provisions they required.

Processes were in place to ensure people did not experience any barriers in accessing the care and support they required. People had access to in house professionals, in addition, people’s care records evidenced where people had accessed care from external agencies.

People told us they felt in control of their care and support. They told us they were treated fairly and felt confident about sharing their views.

Feedback from staff and leaders confirmed that although they had not faced any barriers in accessing care for people, they were not afraid to challenge any situations where this may arise. Staff said they had completed training around EDHR (Equality, Diversity and Human Rights), which helped to recognise, promote and protect people's protected characteristics. Staff showed a good awareness of what discrimination meant and how to challenge any concerns.

Processes were in place to help ensure people’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. Electronic care planning meant people’s care plans and profiles could be shared across a multidisciplinary team.

People were involved in decisions about their future, and they felt listened to. People told us they made decisions about their home. People talked about what they hoped to do in the future and told us they talked to staff about their plans.

Feedback from leaders confirmed that although people expressed wish not to discuss future wishes regarding death and dying, people would be fully supported to make decisions about their future care, should they wish to do so. Staff told us they held conversations with people about their futures plans and aspirations.

Although processes were in place to ensure people had full control over their wishes for their future care, including their wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation, the people being supported were of a young age and often did not wish to discuss end of life care. People's care records contained information about their long-term plans, which included, living more independently in a community-based setting.