Rosebery House

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. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 85 (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.
People we spoke with were complimentary about the staff and told us their privacy and dignity were always maintained. People described staff as caring, compassionate, and respectful. One person said, “The staff are very kind and caring.” Another person said,” Staff pick you up when you are feeling down, they take my breath away.”
Staff were supportive, friendly, and caring. They treated people with dignity and compassion, and their interactions were consistently respectful and encouraging. This demonstrated a culture of kindness and respect throughout the service.
The atmosphere in the home was extremely positive. Staff excelled at helping people achieve positive outcomes, building confidence, and supporting them to develop independence in managing their mental health. They were highly dedicated to ensuring people consistently received a high standard of care in line with their needs and preferred choices
 

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People were truly respected and valued as individuals and empowered to be partners in their care with a strong, visible person-centred culture lead by the provider and implemented by care staff.

Staff we spoke with were able to tell us about people who lived at the home, their likes and dislikes and any interests they had. Staff told us about people’s lives, what people enjoyed doing and people’s routines or habits. This demonstrated staff knew the people they supported well.

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

People who lived at Rosebery House were truly respected and valued as individuals and were empowered as partners in their care. People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support. People were respected, listened to, and had an influence on how care was provided. For example, Rosebery House had regular meetings where people were encouraged to express their views to have a direct impact on the care and support, they received.

The service strived to help people live independent and fulfilling lives. For example, one person expressed a wish to take control of their own finances and develop their cooking skills. During their time living at the service, they were supported to achieve both aims. As a result, they became more independent, gained confidence, and enhanced their daily living skills. Staff told us, "[Name] gone from being very vulnerable to a place where he is finally happy with himself." Staff were happy to celebrate the persons success with them.

Staff were trained to support people in ways that maximised their independence. This included enabling people to manage their own medicines, prepare meals, and maintain their homes where possible. For example, we saw people preparing their own lunch and tidying the kitchen after their lunch.

Staff worked with people to build confidence and develop life skills. This included supporting people to access the community, attend appointments independently, and pursue hobbies or employment.

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.

Staff were listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes.

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. The service worked with people to plan for when they experienced periods of distress, so their freedoms were restricted only if there was no alternative.

Staff knew people very well which meant they recognised potential early warning signs of distress and how to distract a person, how to remove sensory triggers and how to keep them safe. Staff could talk in detail about people’s care and support needs.

Record of incidents and behaviours were completed each time there was an incident, detailing what happened before, during and afterwards, who was there, and any action taken. Each month these were evaluated to look at any themes or trends and assessed to see if any further action needed to be taken. Staff were involved in debriefing sessions following incidents of distress, to reflect upon what went well, what could be done better and if any changes were needed to the staff’s approach.

The provider consistently prioritised staff wellbeing and created a culture that supported and empowered staff to deliver high‑quality, person‑centred care. Staff told us the provider remained highly committed to continually improving the service and ensuring people experienced the best possible outcomes.

Staff consistently spoke positively about the management team. They said leaders demonstrated a strong and visible passion for improving people’s quality of life, and this vision was clearly shared across the workforce. Staff told us they felt proud to work for the service and described feeling valued, appreciated, and motivated in their roles.

Leaders recognised and celebrated individual contributions, and staff told us this acknowledgement helped drive improvements in practice. Staff said they felt confident to raise ideas, suggest changes, and contribute to service development. They reported feeling empowered and supported to influence how the service operated.

Staff described a culture that promoted openness, innovation, and creative problem‑solving. They said managers were approachable, accessible, and responsive to new ways of working. Staff told us leaders had the knowledge, skills, and experience required to drive continuous improvement and maintain high standards of care. One staff member said, I never feel judged here. if I’m struggling, I can say so and I get support straight away.”

The provider ensured staff had regular opportunities for reflection, learning, and development. Staff received one‑to‑one supervision, appraisals, peer support, and team meetings. They told us these forums enabled them to share best practice, discuss people’s needs, and feel involved in shaping how the service developed. Staff consistently reported feeling respected, listened to, and well supported by the leadership team.

The provider demonstrated a strong commitment to equality, diversity, and inclusion. Policies and practices were in place to uphold these values, ensuring the service remained responsive to the diverse needs of the people using it.