You are here

Rose Belle Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 10 March 2020

About the service

Rose Belle is a residential care home providing personal care for up to seven people living with a learning disability. At the time of inspection there were five people living in the home.

People living in the home have their own bedroom and access to a large communal lounge and open plan dining room. There is a quieter space close to the staff office on the ground floor.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Incidents were captured and used to inform care planning to ensure risks were managed effectively, but they were not analysed at service level to identify any themes and trends. Fire evacuation was not practised in line with the procedure and we had some concerns with how the provider managed medicines. However, people were receiving their medicines safely and as prescribed. People were supported by enough suitably trained staff who knew how to keep people safe. The home was clean, and procedures were in place to reduce the risk and control the spread of any infections.

Audits used to measure the safety and quality of services provided were minimal and in general were not frequent enough to drive improvement in a timely way. Formal feedback was gathered from people using the service, staff and external professionals. The feedback was all positive and consistently praised the staff and management for the service they delivered. A clear values base was evident promoting people’s autonomy and independence wherever possible

People were supported effectively by well trained staff who worked with all relevant professionals to meet people’s individual needs. 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; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff showed people respect, giving them choices around how they spent their days. People had their own space and could interact with others or not dependant on their preference at that time. Meetings were held to gather people’s feedback and steps were taken to make any changes people wanted in how the home was run. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

Comprehensive care plans allowed staff good information on people’s needs and preferences in how they wanted to be supported. Information was available on people’s life histories and any interests they had. Staff supported them with these and considered the care and support people would need at the end of their life. There had been no complaints in the last 12 months, but the registered manager had taken the initiative to investigate a safeguarding concern under their complaints policy to ensure if they needed to make any changes in practice they were able to do so.

We have made two recommendations. One in relation to medicine management and one in relation to continuous improvemen

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 10 March 2020

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 10 March 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 10 March 2020

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 10 March 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 10 March 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.