- Care home
Rosewood House
Assessment report published 23 October 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Our view of the service
About the service
The service is a residential care home for up to 17 service users. There were 15 people living at the service, at the time of the assessment.
Who the service is for
The service supports older people who require personal care, including people living with dementia.
Key findings
We carried out this assessment on 15 and 16 September 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.
Staff demonstrated good knowledge of infection prevention and control procedures and could explain how these were applied in their day-to-day work. However, training records and information provided by the provider was not always clear or consistent. Whilst governance systems were effective in many areas, including the use of audits to monitor the quality and safety of the service, oversight of staff training did not always provide clear assurance that mandatory training was being monitored and refreshed appropriately.
Staff spoke positively about working at the service and told us they were supported by the management team. Staff described managers as being approachable and felt comfortable raising concerns or asking for advice when needed.
People's medicines were managed and administered safely. Effective communication systems were in place to keep staff informed of changes in people's care and support needs. Staff meetings were used to share information and learning. People were supported to make choices about their daily lives and were helped to achieve their goals where possible.
People's care plans were regularly reviewed and reflected their individual needs, preferences and dislikes. During the assessment, issues identified within the environment were acted on promptly by the service, including maintenance concerns that were reported for immediate attention.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and knew how to report concerns both within the service and to external organisations if required. Staff also understood people's individual needs and could explain how care plans and risk assessments were used to guide support.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of supporting people's choices, respecting consent and promoting independence. One staff member told us they would, "Respect consent" and use different approaches before offering support again.
External professionals spoke positively about working with the service. They told us staff provided information when requested, recognised changes in people's needs and sought advice and support when required.
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 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.
People's experience of this service
Relatives told us their loved ones were safe and settled living at the service. Relatives said they had no concerns about people's safety and described the service as, "Feeling like a home." A relative told us their loved one's anxiety had reduced since moving into the service.
People and their relatives spoke positively about the staff team. Comments included, "The staff are very good" and "The staff are super, they look after you without imposing authority." Relatives described staff as caring and organised and told us there were usually staff available when they visited. A person told us call bells were answered quickly and the staff were cheerful and happy in the mornings.
Relatives told us people were treated with dignity and respect. Staff demonstrated an understanding of supporting people's choices and respecting their independence. A relative said the staff, "Treat her with dignity and respect."
Feedback from a health professional was positive about the care people received. They told us staff and managers had a good understanding of supporting people living with dementia and had always demonstrated respectful and positive interactions with people. They said staff understood people's individual needs and how dementia could affect their abilities and behaviours.
Feedback about communication was mostly positive. However, some relatives said communication could be improved, a relative said “My main issue is that communication could be better”. Other relatives told us staff kept them informed about their loved one's wellbeing, contacted them when needed and used the provider's app to share updates. A relative said, "Communication is really good."
People were supported to take part in activities. We saw an activities programme displayed and observed staff encouraging people to join activities during our visit. A relative told us staff, "Always try to involve them in activities."
We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI) to observe interactions and gain an understanding of the support people received. A SOFI is a way of observing care that helps us understand people's experiences. We saw staff interacting with people in a calm, attentive and efficient manner. Staff clearly explained what they were doing and used verbal prompts when supporting people with choice and during mealtimes. People were supported during their mealtime.
People and their relatives spoke positively about the registered manager. Relatives described the registered manager as approachable, responsive and willing to listen. Relatives told us they would feel comfortable raising concerns if they needed to. Comments included, "She is a good manager, very efficient, if I mention things she is always there and she will listen" and "[The registered manager] is approachable."