CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Rose House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe medicines systems, person-centred risk management and effective infection prevention measures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs and goals. People were supported with communication, food, healthcare, activities and decisions about their care, with relevant staff training and professional input.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed communicating calmly and respectfully. People and families described kind and compassionate care, and people were involved in decisions and care planning.
- Responsive?
- Good
- The home adapted support to people's communication, sensory and personal needs. People could personalise their rooms, take part in preferred activities, and raise concerns or complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Leaders were described as approachable and supportive. Inspectors found an open culture, staff involvement in improvements and monthly quality checks that helped reduce risks.
What inspectors found, October 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care with strong support for independence and communication.
The unannounced inspection took place on 1, 3 and 6 September 2021. It was prompted partly by concerns about behaviour management. Inspectors also checked infection prevention and control.
The home supported three young adults and could support up to four people. Inspectors spoke with staff, reviewed care, medicine and management records, observed care, and used a symbol-based communication tool with two people.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines practice, individual care plans, kind support, meaningful activities and effective quality checks.
Person-centred culture
The home based its approach on people's needs and quality of life. Staff understood that people should come first.
“The needs and quality of life of people formed the basis of the culture at the service.” from the report
Positive risk support
People were involved in managing their own risks where possible. Staff supported people to build confidence in everyday activities such as shopping.
“Staff anticipated and managed risk in a person-centred way, there was a culture of positive risk taking.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People chose activities linked to their preferences, goals and care plans. Inspectors saw people going for walks, shopping and taking a train journey.
“People made choices and took part in meaningful activities which were part of their planned care and support.” from the report
Open leadership
Staff said they felt supported and able to raise concerns. Leaders sought feedback from people and families and used it to improve the home.
“There was a transparent, open and honest culture between people, those important to them, staff and leaders.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you identify and reduce the causes of distress for each person?
- 02When might restrictive interventions be considered, and how do you involve the person and family in reviewing them?
- 03How will you communicate with my relative, including through pictures, symbols, Makaton or other methods?
- 04How will my relative be involved in choosing activities, meals and daily routines?
- 05How do you use feedback, complaints and incident reviews to make changes to the home?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control, and it examined concerns about behaviour management. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Rose House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 November 2020.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.