Rosewood Care Home

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Relatives told us staff understood what was important to people and provided care in the way they wanted it. The registered manager told us the service responded to people’s needs in a timely manner.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Relatives told us staff worked well with other services to ensure people received continuity of care. Staff said they worked with a small number of people, which enabled them to get to know people and provide continuity of care. People had care workers who had been matched to them. The registered manager told us they took time to make sure people had a member of staff who had similar interests and personalities. Records showed effective partnership working had taken place during reviews of people’s care.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The Accessible Information Standard tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. It also says that people should get the support they need in relation to communication. We found the provider was meeting the AIS. People’s communication needs were recorded, and provision was made to make sure people had information that was suitable for their needs.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Relatives told us they were aware how to raise any concerns or complaints and were confident the management team would take their issues seriously and respond. The registered manager told us they regularly reviewed feedback shared by people and families about the service and any concerns people had. The provider had a complaint policy and process to manage any complaints. The registered manager kept a log of all complaints made and actions taken in response.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Relatives did not specifically comment on equity in access but were consistently positive about the responsiveness of the service. The registered manager told us staff supported people where needed to access local services. Assessments completed before people moved into the service to check whether any adaptations or equipment was required for their care.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The registered manager told us they recognised the barriers people living with dementia may face. People were supported to access services, local communities and healthcare by staff where this was needed. Staff had been supported to complete equality and diversity training. The assessment process included a check of whether there were any unmet needs for people and signposted them to other services where relevant.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. People had been supported to express their wishes about future care needs, which were recorded in care records. Staff were aware of people’s wishes for the future, for example whether people wanted to go to hospital for further treatment or whether they had a ‘do not attempt resuscitation’ plan in place. Staff knew where people kept documents relating to their decisions.