Roster Home Care Ltd - Norwich Office

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

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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 provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People told us their needs had been assessed when they started using the service and regularly thereafter. People told us they were involved in this and felt listened to. A person who used the service said, “When I first discussed what I needed, I was very nervous about having someone help me because I have always been very independent. However, the carers have been very good and really support me. I can talk with them very well and they listen to what I want and make sure I am happy with what they are doing.” Records confirmed people’s needs had been thoroughly and holistically assessed including their communication needs. A relative told us, “Despite [relative’s] limited communication, staff listen to them, and me, and will try and deliver a high standard of care to enhance [relative’s] quality of life.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Evidence showed people felt in control of the care they received and that the service sought information on what was important to them; records confirmed that. People told us staff liaised with them consistently whilst delivering care ensuring their preferences were met. We also heard examples of how skilled staff were at delivering flexible support which was dependent on people’s needs and strengths on each given day; people told us they appreciated this.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. Professionals who gave us with feedback told us the service worked well with them for the benefit of the people who used the service. They told us communication was good and that the service listened to any feedback or concerns. A professional said, “I find Roster Home Care easy to work with and flexible in accommodating individual’s needs to ensure personalised care delivery. They communicate directly with me regarding any challenges encountered in providing care, and we work collaboratively to resolve issues.” People agreed that seeing a consistent staff group enhanced the service they received. A person who used the service said, “They are usually the same group of staff, so I have gotten used to them and they know what to do for me without me having to keep telling them.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. We heard many examples of how the service supported people to live a better quality of life including seeking advice and support as needed for their health and wellbeing. One relative told us staff supported their relative to do daily exercises to help maintain their physical health. A person who used the service said, “If staff think I need a doctor or some other advice, they will sort it out for me.” There was consistent evidence people felt in control of the care they received and that staff supported them to live healthier lives with as much independence as possible.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People told us they were happy with the service they received and that it met their needs and expectations. A relative said, “I’m not sure how either of us would survive without their wonderful care.” Another relative told us how the service had positively impacted their life and that of their relative. They said, “The care intervention has a big impact on my life too. Having total confidence in the staff allows me to go out and have some quality of life myself without worrying.” Records showed the service regularly reviewed people’s care and sought feedback on it. We saw that where shortfalls had been identified, actions had been taken to address them.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We saw formal and legal consent was in place and people had a choice in which aspect of the service consent was given. People also told us that staff always sought their verbal consent before assisting them. One person who used the service said, “Staff are very good… they never do anything without checking with me first.” A relative told us, “Staff are always keen to make sure [relative’s] preferences are clear and that [relative] is consenting to what they are doing.”