ABI Homes - Roman House

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.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 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. A relative said, “[Relative’s] periods of emotional distress have reduced because staff know them well and their needs are being met.” A staff member said, “[Person] will tell us what they want, we make sure we are around them to help them and provider the support where it’s needed.”

The provider understood people’s needs and ensured care was consistent and well-coordinated. Staff knew people well and provided continuity through stable staffing and care plans that reflected people’s routines and preferences. The provider worked with external professionals, such as GPs and social workers, and shared information appropriately to ensure care remained joined‑up. Relatives told us communication was effective and they were kept informed of any changes to people’s care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up‑to‑date information in formats tailored to individual needs. This included the use of social stories to support decision‑making. Social stories are personalised, easy‑to‑understand narratives that use simple language and visual prompts to explain situations, choices and potential outcomes. These helped people understand information in a way that made sense to them.

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. A relative said, “Yes, they communicate via e-mail, invite us to meetings and reviews. Any changes in routine are updated to me.” Another said, “They do listen to us as parents and speak to [Relative] as best as possible.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. We saw evidence people were supported to access health professionals as needed, for example, the dentist.

Staff and leaders actively listened to people who were more likely to experience inequality in their care and outcomes, including where restrictions were required to keep people safe. The provider completed an annual restrictive practice review that considered individual circumstances and everyday restrictions such as locked cabinets, chemical storage, medicines management, one‑to‑one support, and locked doors. This enabled restrictions to be tailored to the person, ensuring they reflected individual needs, abilities and risks rather than a blanket approach. Restrictions were regularly reviewed to ensure they continued to promote positive outcomes for each person. A relative said, “We are thrilled [Relative] has the same life as we have at home.”

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. Care plans contained details about peoples wishes, where people were unable to provide this the provider sought the views of loved ones to contribute to the care plan.