Rosemil Care

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 provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (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 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.

The provider placed people at the centre of their care and adapted services to meet individual preferences and routines. Visits were scheduled at times requested by people and their families, and care was delivered flexibly to respect personal routines. For example, staff accommodated a person’s request for an early morning call and daily fresh bed linen.

Relatives confirmed the service was flexible and responsive. One relative said, “[The registered manager] was extremely flexible in accommodating this because they understood the importance of continuity of routine to a person of my mother’s age and condition.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People received care from a consistent staff team who knew them well, and the provider ensured care was well-coordinated and integrated with other services. Care was joined up and delivered flexibly to meet individual needs, particularly for those with complex health conditions. Partner agencies praised the provider for efficient handovers and clear communication, describing their approach as “far exceeding expectations.”

The provider was exceptional at developing appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The registered manager ensured open communication and provided accessible information. When the local authority advised there was no way to communicate with a person, the service allocated an experienced care worker who developed a non-verbal system using eye contact, body language, and blink codes, enabling the person to make choices and stay involved in decisions. The service also used tailored strategies for people with complex needs, such as eye gaze technology and flash cards. These methods were shared with commissioners and partner agencies to maintain consistency and uphold the person’s voice across all services

The registered manager told us, “[Person] uses eye gaze technology, and they have a mobile phone that they text with. They text me every day… Sometimes I write it down on a flash card. They blink once for yes, and twice for no.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Relatives confirmed they knew how to raise concerns and felt confident these would be addressed promptly. A relative said, “[The registered manager] is constantly contacting us. They either text or call us. They call to make sure we are ok.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider ensured people could access the care they needed when they needed it. For example, a person’s calls were significantly overrunning, and the provider identified this as a risk that their needs were not being met within the allocated time. The registered manager raised this with the local authority and requested for a reassessment so that additional time could be added to their care calls, ensuring the person’s needs were fully met and promoting equity in care delivery.

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.

Information was included in people’s care records about their preferences and what was important to them. Staff understood and respected people’s cultures, religion and sexuality.

These actions demonstrated a commitment to personalised care that respected people’s protected characteristics, promoting fairness and equality in experiences and outcomes.

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.

While end-of-life care has not yet been provided at Rosemil Care, the registered manager confirmed that palliative care training and competency assessments would be implemented if required, showing forward planning and commitment to safe, person-centred care.