Rosebank Care Home

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

Systems were in place to ensure people’s needs were fully assessed before moving into the home. For example, people had the opportunity to visit the home to meet the staff and other people who lived there. Staff understood the importance of developing relationships with people who were new to the service.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. For example, risk assessments and care plans reflected professional guidance received about people’s care needs and we observed staff following this guidance when assisting people. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s eating and drinking needs and any risks associated with this. This included when people needed a modified or special diet.

The provider worked across teams and services to support people. For example, staff worked with external agencies to make sure people received all the care they needed. A record was maintained of appointments and outcomes, and care plans were updated to include any advice and guidance staff needed to follow. A member of staff explained the circumstances and process for making referrals to other health and social care professionals. A family member told us, “If [relative] needs any medical intervention they get it. Staff are so on board.”

The provider supported people to manage their health but did not always support people to manage their wellbeing, so they could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. For example, people were supported to manage their health and wellbeing. Staff supported people to access health appointments and other health services when needed. Family members told us healthier living was promoted, and they were confident any health concerns would be addressed and resolved. A family member commented, “Acted very quickly on recent concerns.” People told us they ate healthy meals and were involved in menu planning, food shopping and the preparation of meals.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. For example, systems were in place to record and monitor food and fluid intake were this was needed for some people. Outcomes were developed and agreed with people and regularly reviewed. For example, people were supported to maintain and develop skills including such as cooking, cleaning tasks and travelling using public transport.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. For example, staff obtained peoples consent before providing care and support and decisions made on behalf of people who lacked capacity were made following best interest decision-making processes.