Rose House

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has improved to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (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 had a shared vision, strategy and culture that was clearly understood and embraced by staff. The registered manager and provider-level leaders demonstrated a commitment to creating a homely, inclusive and person-centred environment. Staff described the service as “like an extended family” and this was reflected in the warm interactions observed between staff and people. The culture promoted dignity, respect and empowerment, with staff supporting people to maintain life skills and independence. The service had begun embedding the principles of Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, although further training was needed to ensure all staff fully understood and applied these consistently.

Leadership at Rose House was visible, compassionate and inclusive. The registered manager led by example. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager’s support, describing them as “professional and approachable” and someone who “moves heaven and earth” for people. Staff felt valued and supported, with regular supervision, open-door policies and recognition schemes such as “staff of the month”. Leaders were committed to developing staff, with systems in place to grow team members into management roles. Staff described a strong team ethos and a sense of belonging, which contributed to a stable and motivated workforce.

Staff felt confident to raise concerns and knew the systems to follow. They reported that action would be taken in response to feedback and that they were listened to. There was evidence of reflective practice and learning from incidents, with staff able to describe how feedback had led to changes in care delivery. The registered manager fostered a psychologically safe environment where staff felt empowered to speak up, and this was supported by open communication and visible leadership.

The provider promoted equality and respected diversity across the workforce. Staff with protected characteristics were supported. Reasonable adjustments were made, such as risk assessments for pregnant staff and health conditions. Staff described the registered manager as passionate about inclusion, and there was evidence of cultural sensitivity in care planning, such as supporting people to celebrate Diwali and wear traditional clothing. However, further training on autism and anxiety was identified as a need to ensure equity in support and understanding across all conditions. The provider had plans for this to take place already.

Governance systems were in place to monitor quality and safety. The provider had oversight mechanisms that identified concerns and acted on them promptly. Audits were carried out, and improvements were already being considered at provider level.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities, and care records were detailed and person-centred. However, some gaps were noted in risk assessments, such as missing mattress settings, which the provider was addressing. The service was well maintained, and health and safety checks were completed, including fire safety and legionella testing.

The provider worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff liaised with diabetic nurses, social workers and mental health teams, and there was evidence of seamless care across services. Families were involved in care planning and spoke positively about the support provided. The service engaged with the community through activities such as pantomimes, beach trips and religious celebrations. Staff advocated for people, including challenging funding decisions and ensuring hospital passports were in place.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to learning and continuous improvement. Staff described how lessons were learned from incidents and how feedback was used to improve care. Training was ongoing, including around specialist learning disability and positive behaviour support, although further embedding was needed. Staff were encouraged to reflect on their practice, and new ideas were welcomed. Innovations included adapting the environment for sensory needs and planning a sensory garden. The provider was exploring dementia accreditation and had introduced new equipment to meet people’s changing needs.