CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by North East Autism Society

Rosehill

31 Thornholme Road, Sunderland, SR2 7JX

Goodpublished 2 February 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask

Safe?: Good; Inspectors found detailed risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, effective safeguarding systems and safe medicine management. Infection prevention arrangements were also in place.
Effective?: Good; This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating, but the report does not give the individual carried-over rating here.
Caring?: Good; This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating, but the report does not give the individual carried-over rating here.
Responsive?: Good; This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating, but the report does not give the individual carried-over rating here.
Well-led?: Good; Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture. Managers reviewed the service, involved people and families, reported incidents appropriately and worked with other agencies.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2024

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with effective management and oversight.

The inspection took place on 3, 9 and 22 January 2024. One inspector met four people, contacted six relatives, spoke with managers and staff, and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.

The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, detailed risk assessments and suitable safeguarding arrangements. People were supported to make choices and live with as much independence as possible.

The management team was found to be approachable and responsive. Managers reviewed incidents, worked with other agencies and checked whether improvements were needed.

This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. The other three question ratings were not inspected during this visit and were carried forward from the previous inspection to calculate the overall Good rating.

What inspectors praised

Detailed risk planning
Staff understood people's risks and used clear assessments to plan how to reduce avoidable harm.
“The risk assessments were detailed, very clear and the staff ensured they effectively planned for all potential risks.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, use their strengths and pursue their own goals.
“People were supported to have maximum possible choice, control and independence.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked as competent. Medicine records were regularly checked for accuracy.
“Staff were trained in medicines management and were assessed as competent to administer people's medicines.” from the report
Active management
Managers regularly checked how the service was operating and looked for improvements.
“The management team regularly reviewed the systems and processes in the service to determine if improvements were needed and where enhancements could be made.” from the report

What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report

01What has been reviewed or changed since the inspection in relation to Effective, Caring and Responsive?
02How are people's individual risks and risk assessments kept up to date?
03How do you check that medicine records remain accurate and that staff remain competent?
04How are people and their relatives involved in decisions about care and support?
05How does the STEP process respond when there are changes in a person's presentation?

This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings carried over from the previous inspection published on 20 April 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 2024 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Rosehill

3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

February 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Rosehill →
April 2018Goodstayed Good
Safe: GoodWell-led: Good
We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk
March 2016Good
Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read this report on cqc.org.uk
May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
Read this report on cqc.org.uk
November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
Read this report on cqc.org.uk
February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
Read this report on cqc.org.uk
January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

Sunderland, SR2

Good

Residential

Sunderland, SR2 · 0.1 km

Good

Residential

Rated 8 years agocare home

What inspectors found, February 2024

Detailed risk planning

Choice and independence

Safe medicines

Active management

Every inspection of Rosehill

Or stay at home with a private carer

Other services run by North East Autism Society

Other care homes near Sunderland