- Care home
Alexandra Rose Residential Care Home
Assessment report published 29 July 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Our view of the service
About the service
The service is a residential care home with 2 floors, each providing care and support to older people with residential needs. There were 25 people using the service at the time of the inspection.
Who the service is for
This service provides support to older people with residential needs and for people living with dementia.
Key findingsWe carried out this assessment on 18 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.
People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control and freedom over their lives. One person told us, "No restrictions, get up when I want, go to sleep if I want to," whilst another commented, "You are not compelled to do anything."
Staff supported people safely because they had the skills, knowledge and training to meet people's needs. Staff assessed and managed risks in ways that promoted people's independence while protecting them from avoidable harm. Staff understood their safeguarding responsibilities, managed medicines safely and maintained a clean, safe and well-maintained environment.
Staff assessed people's needs thoroughly and reviewed their care as those needs changed. They worked proactively with GPs and other healthcare professionals to help people achieve positive outcomes. Staff completed regular training, supervision and competency assessments, enabling them to deliver care that reflected current best practice. Staff involved people and, where appropriate, those important to them in planning and reviewing care.
Staff treated people with kindness, compassion and respect. They built meaningful relationships with people, understood what mattered to them and promoted their dignity, privacy and emotional wellbeing. Staff encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and adapted their support to reflect individual preferences.
Staff delivered personalised care that reflected people's preferences, life histories and changing needs. They supported people to make meaningful choices about their daily routines, meals, activities and social relationships. Staff encouraged people to maintain hobbies, access community activities and spend time with those important to them, helping to promote wellbeing and reduce social isolation.
The provider promoted equality, diversity and human rights by respecting people's individual identities, cultural backgrounds, beliefs and communication needs. Staff supported people to maintain relationships with family, friends and the wider community, helping people to remain connected to the people and activities that mattered most to them.
Leaders created a positive and supportive culture where people, relatives and staff felt listened to and valued. Managers maintained effective governance systems that monitored quality, reviewed risks, oversaw medicines and drove continuous improvement. Staff described managers as approachable and supportive and spoke positively about teamwork, communication and opportunities to learn and develop.
People's experience of this service
We spoke with 4 people living at the service, 6 relatives and 1 family friend about their experiences. We also completed a Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) in the communal areas to understand the experiences of people who were unable to fully express their views verbally. The SOFI showed people appeared relaxed, comfortable and familiar with the staff supporting them. Staff interacted with people in a calm, patient and respectful way, offering reassurance, encouragement and humour. We observed staff responding promptly to people's requests, recognising non-verbal cues and giving people time to make choices without being rushed.
People consistently told us they were happy living at the service and felt safe, respected and well cared for. One person said, "I don't regret coming," whilst another told us, "I really can't give you any complaints at all." People described staff as kind, caring and responsive, with comments including, "There is nothing they won't do for you," and, "The staff are all lovely." People told us call bells were answered promptly and they felt reassured knowing staff were available whenever they needed support.
People described having choice and control over their daily lives. They told us they chose when to get up and go to bed, where they spent their time, whether to eat in the dining room or their bedroom and whether they wished to participate in activities. Staff encouraged people to remain as independent as possible while providing support when needed.
People and relatives told us care was personalised and reflected what mattered to each individual. Staff knew people's routines, preferences, hobbies and health needs and adapted support as these changed. People spoke positively about enjoying activities such as knitting, gardening, quizzes, singers and chair exercises, whilst those who preferred quieter environments said this choice was respected. Relatives described thoughtful approaches to supporting people's emotional wellbeing, including the use of photographs, music, sensory activities and reassurance to reduce anxiety.
People said staff respected their dignity and privacy. They told us staff explained what they were doing before providing care, sought consent and encouraged them to do as much as possible for themselves. Relatives also described staff as respectful and compassionate during personal care and appreciated the way they communicated with both people and their families.
Relatives consistently spoke positively about the service and many described it as caring, welcoming and homely. Some relatives expressed exceptionally positive views of the service, with several describing it as "10 out of 10" and saying they would recommend it to others. One relative told us the home had "a caring ethos" and "a real community," whilst another said staff "go the extra mile all the time." People and relatives felt able to raise concerns or make suggestions and were confident these would be listened to and acted upon.
Our observations, discussions with people, relatives and staff, together with the SOFI, demonstrated that people experienced compassionate, person-centred care. People were supported to maintain choice, independence and meaningful relationships, and staff promoted not only people's physical wellbeing but also their emotional wellbeing, dignity and quality of life.