Rose Belle

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

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

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We received positive feedback about staff from relatives. Comments included, “They [staff] certainly have their best interests at heart. [Relative] is happy, relaxed and really enjoys where they live thanks to management and staff at Rose Belle.” Another person said “I have never had cause for any concerns, and I feel that the staff treat people well. They certainly have my[relative’s] best interests at heart” and “We are extremely happy with [relative’s] placement at Rose Belle. We visit regularly to take [relative] out. The staff are all very friendly.” One person we spoke to told us they were very happy living at Rose Belle.

We observed staff were attentive to people’s needs and positive interactions between staff and people.

Staff spoke positively and understood the importance of treating people with respect. Comments from staff included, “People are supported in a respectful and person-centred way” and “We treat residents with kindness, respect and patience.”

We received positive feedback from external health professionals with regards to the staff teams care and support for people at Rose Belle. One professional told us, “The staff we interact with have always been knowledgeable and professional.”

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

It was not always clear when care plans and risk assessments had been updated, we found they did not always contain the relevant information for staff to support people with their individual needs and preferences. For example, individual risks around some conditions such as diabetes not being tailored to personal needs.

During our onsite inspection, we observed staff supporting people well and staff spoke positively about treating people as individuals. Staff we spoke with did have a good knowledge of people’s likes and dislikes and people were supported by a consistent team of staff.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff knew people well and supported them to access the local community, including education facilities. We observed activities taking place during our onsite inspection and the positive impact this was having on the people living at Rose Belle. For example, we saw one person dancing with a staff member and enjoying time outside in the garden space.

People were able to maintain relationships with relatives and friends, and visitors were welcomed. Relatives confirmed they could visit at any time and there were no restrictions in place.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed that staff knew people and their needs well. Comments from relatives and professionals told us staff were available to help when needed. One comment from a professional we received was, “They [staff] demonstrate a clear understanding of each individual resident's needs.”

During our on-site assessment, we observed staff responded to people’s needs in a timely manner and there were staff available to assist when needed. We did not receive any negative feedback in relation to staffing levels.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Feedback from staff told us they felt supported and respected. Comments included, “Management is very approachable and maintains an open-door policy” and “Management is approachable and open to hear any feedback.” Staff received supervisions and yearly appraisals and were encouraged to attend regular team meetings.