Rose 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 71 (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 ensured people were at the centre of their care and support, and worked in partnership with them to respond to changes in their needs. Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of people’s preferences, routines, and communication styles. Care plans were detailed and reflected individual goals, including 1-page profiles and personalised risk assessments. People were supported to make choices and maintain independence, such as making their own drinks or choosing their meals.

One person told us, “Staff always ask me what I want to do and help me make it happen.” For people with a learning disability and autistic people, the provider aligned with Right support, right care, right culture by recognising individuals as people with a life ahead of them. Staff supported people to learn new skills, participate in meaningful activities, and maintain relationships, promoting autonomy and dignity.

People received coordinated care that met their needs and supported their wellbeing. Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals, including GPs, social workers, and hospice teams, to ensure continuity of care. Transitions were planned with input from families and professionals, and care plans were regularly reviewed.
 

One relative said, “They keep us informed and work with the GP and social worker to make sure everything is in place.” For people with a learning disability and autistic people, staff were supported to ask difficult questions to external agencies and tailor individual pathways. The provider demonstrated proactive planning for end-of-life care and transitions, including hospice involvement and palliative training

The provider did not consistently ensure that people received accessible and timely information about their care and support. While some easy-read formats were available, they were not consistently used or adapted to meet people’s communication preferences. One person said, “I do not understand the letters they send me.”

Support plans and records were not always captured in ways that enabled meaningful communication and decision-making. For example, 1 person knew a form of signing to support their speech. However, staff did not. Visual aids were not embedded across the service. This fell short of the expectations in Right support, right care, right culture, which emphasises accessible information to support informed decision-making.

Staff listened to people and involved them in decisions about their care and support. People told us they felt heard and that their views were respected. Complaints were responded to promptly and used to improve the service.
 

One person said, “They always ask me what I think and take it seriously.”
Staff used structured observations, advocates, and 1-to-1 discussions to ensure people who could not verbally communicate were still able to express their views. Feedback was used to shape activities and care routines.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff identified and removed barriers to access, including making reasonable adjustments for mobility and sensory needs. For example, profile beds and special mattresses were introduced to prevent skin breakdowns. People were supported to attend appointments even when mobility was limited. One person told us, “They help me get to my appointments and make sure I understand what’s going on.”
For people with a learning disability and autistic people, the provider implemented flexible appointment times and sensory-friendly environments to ensure equitable access.

People experienced care that was fair and tailored to their individual needs. Staff monitored outcomes and worked to ensure everyone received the same quality of care, regardless of background or circumstances. Staff were trained in equality and diversity and demonstrated inclusive practice.

One relative said, “They treat everyone the same, with respect and kindness.”
For people with a learning disability and autistic people, the provider supported access to community facilities and activities, and ensured people were informed about their rights, including voting and participation in local life.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including end-of-life care. Care plans included future goals and preferences, and staff discussed options with people and their families. Where people did not wish to discuss end-of-life care, staff respected this and planned to revisit the conversation sensitively.
One person said, “They helped me think about what I want in the future.”

The provider demonstrated proactive planning, including hospice involvement, palliative care training, and adapting environments to meet changing needs. The management talked us through a recent example where the person lacked family. They worked with them to ensure all the person’s wishes were followed including dying at home.