We carried out a review of the data available to us about Roses Healthcare on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Roses Healthcare, you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
Roses Healthcare is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the service was primarily providing respite support for families of children and young people with learning disabilities and autism. There were 5 people using the service when we inspected.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support: People and their families were happy with the support they received from the staff who supported them to access fulfilling activities and gain new experiences.
Personalised risk assessments gave clear strategies for staff to follow in keeping people safe, whilst enabling people to be as independent as possible.
Staff were skilled in recognising signs when people experienced emotional distress and knew how to support people to keep them safe. Effective systems were in place to closely monitor incidents and prompt action was taken to mitigate the risk of repeat incidents.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. People were involved with their care and supported to build and develop meaningful relationships. Any complaints or concerns raised were listened to and action taken to address them. The provider used feedback to develop and improve the service.
.
Right Care: People’s support plans were personalised, and people were supported to express their individuality. The staff team were understanding towards the people they supported and were passionate about the care they gave.
People’s dignity was respected, and people had the opportunity to try new experiences, develop new skills and gain independence. Staff supported people to pursue educational and leisure interests. A relative said, “The support given has exceeded our expectations.”
Right culture: People were at the heart of everything the service did. Management and staff were focused on providing individualised care and achieving good outcomes for people and their families.
People were valued and staff encouraged to champion equality, respect and dignity and treat people with warmth. Staff received training on equality and diversity that was embedded in supporting people’s protected characteristics. People were supported to follow their cultural beliefs.
The management team had the specialist skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles and had a clear understanding of people’s needs. Systems and processes were in place to monitor the quality and performance of the service.
There was good communication between, staff, management and families. People and staff were listened to and encouraged to give their feedback about the service. The manager was committed to driving improvement and provide the best care and outcomes for people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The service was inspected but not rated (published 5 April 2019)
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Roses Healthcare is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to children, younger adults and older people living in their own houses and flats in the community. Not everyone using this service receives the regulated activity; The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
On this inspection we were unable to provide the service with a rating. This is because the service had not been providing care and support to enough people over a long enough time period for us to review.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People received care from the provider who was kind, caring and passionate about providing the care and support people required.
The provider and the registered manager had the skills and knowledge to provide the care and support to the person using the service.
People had care plans that were personalised to their individual needs and wishes. Records contained detailed information to assist staff to provide care and support in an individualised manner that respected each person's individual requirements and promoted treating people with dignity.
People's health and well-being was monitored and they were supported to access health professionals in a timely manner when they needed to. People were supported with their dietary requirements and experienced caring relationships with staff. The provider and registered manager had appropriate medication training and administered medicines in accordance with their policies and procedures.
The provider and registered manager understood their responsibilities to safeguard people and knew how to respond if they had any concerns. Care plans contained risk assessments which gave instructions to staff how to mitigate risks; these enabled and empowered people to live as independent a life as possible safely.
The provider and registered manager were the only people working at the service and all support was provided by them. The provider had safe recruitment procedures in place, however because no other staff were employed we were unable to make a judgement on the safe recruitment of staff.
The provider and registered manager knew their responsibilities as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) 2005. The provider was aware of how to make referrals to the Court of Protection if people lacked capacity to consent to aspects of their care and support and were being deprived of their liberty.
The provider had systems in place to measure the quality of the service provided. However, because only one person used the service we were unable to make a judgement the effectiveness of the systems in place.