Rosehill Care

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

This is the first inspection of this newly registered service and therefore assessed all 6 quality statements from this key question. Based on the findings of this assessment, our rating for this key question is good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. People needs and wishes were assessed before they started using the service. People were helped to stay healthy and well. 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.

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 staff knew how to support them with known risks and that they were involved in planning the care they received.

Staff told us people’s needs and wishes were assessed and this information was used to develop individualised care plans for them to follow. Staff also said they were given the time to read through people’s care plans which meant they could become familiar with their individual needs, preferences and daily routines.

People received personal care and support at home that was planned and delivered in line with their assessed needs and wishes.

People told us staff provided them with all the care and support they needed.

Staff worked well together as a team to deliver consistently safe care to people in line with legislation and current evidence-based best practice and standards. Staff told us they followed guidance in care plans when supporting people. A member of staff said, “Care plans set out exactly what tasks we have to perform to meet people’s needs. They are constantly being reviewed and updated when there’s any changes to a person’s needs.”

People’s care plans contained detailed information about how individuals preferred staff to meet their personal care needs and wishes.

People told us they received joined up care from the provider working with the relevant external community health and social care professionals.

The registered manager and staff told us they worked closely with various external community health and social care bodies and professionals and welcomed their views, advice, and best practice ideas. A member of staff said, “I often work closely with district nurses. For example, when I supported someone with a pressure wound a district nurse advised me how best to protect the wound when I was providing personal care and raise the alarm if the wound deteriorated.”

We requested feedback from external community health and social care professionals and bodies this provider worked closely with, but none was received.

The provider worked in partnership with various community-based health and social care professionals and agencies including, GPs, district nurses and social workers. We saw recorded evidence of guidance external health care professionals had provided staff to follow.

People told us they had access to relevant community-based health care professionals and were confident staff would call the doctor or emergency services if they were required.

Staff received training in how to meet and appropriately manage people’s health care needs and conditions including emergency first aid, which formed part of all new staffs induction. Staff told us the registered manager was always available to offer them support and guidance in relation to managing people’s health care needs and conditions.

People were supported to stay healthy and well. Care plans detailed their health care needs and conditions and the action staff needed to take to keep people fit and well. Systems were also in place for staff to alert the registered manager if they became concerned about a person’s deteriorating health.

It was clear from feedback we received from people who used the service that managers and staff recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement to ensure they maintained high-quality, person-centred and safe care for people. The outcome of all the audits, monitoring checks and feedback the providers received from stakeholders were routinely analysed to identify issues, learn lessons and develop action plans to improve the service they provided people.

The registered manager recognised the importance of learning lessons and continuous improvement to ensure they maintained high-quality, person-centred and safe care for people receiving a home care service from them. The quality and safety of the service people received was continuously monitored by the registered manager, who conducted weekly in-person and telephone welfare checks on people they supported.

The outcome of all the audits, monitoring checks and feedback the providers received from stakeholders were routinely analysed to identify issues, learn lessons and develop action plans to improve the service they provided people.

People told us they consented to the care and support they received from staff.

Managers and staff confirmed they had received Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLs) training and were aware of their duties and responsibilities in relation to the MCA and DoLs. Staff told us peoples care plans made it clear what decisions people could make for themselves. A member of staff said, “I always ask for a person’s consent before providing them with personal care.”

People’s care records showed the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty.