Rotherview

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 22 December 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

We visited the service on the 18 November and 25 November 2025.

Rotherview is a residential care home providing support to people with a learning disability and autistic people. At the time of the assessment 8 people lived at the home.

Our inspection was prompted due to the age of rating. We gathered information from people who used the service, relatives, the deputy manager, care staff, and health and social care partners.

We assessed the service against the Right support, right care, right culture guidance to determine whether the provider ensured people with a learning disability and autistic people were treated with respect, equality and dignity, had choice and independence, and were supported to access their local communities. We found the provider met these expectations and consistently delivered support in line with the guidance. However, improvement was needed in how people were supported with making choices and decisions.

Risks to people were understood and managed effectively to reduce the likelihood of harm. However, we identified some unmanaged risks which needed to be considered to ensure all potential hazards were fully addressed. Risks to the environment had been considered, and regular checks were taking place; however, water temperature checks required improved oversight and governance monitoring to ensure temperatures remained within recommended guidelines. The environment was homely and tailored to people’s individual needs and preferences.

Staff understood how to safeguard people and protect their wellbeing. Following our visit, we raised safeguarding concerns relating to financial safeguards. People and those important to them were involved in assessments and reviews of care plans. People were supported to be independent and to access leisure activities aligned with their interests and goals. Mental capacity was not consistently taken into account, and individuals were not always supported to make informed decisions regarding their finances or their medicines. The management team agreed to take prompt action to address this.

People received their medicines as prescribed by trained and competency assessed staff. Staff had completed sufficient training and were knowledgeable about people’s needs.

Auditing systems were in place but required strengthening and better embedding into practice, particularly around financial governance, oversight of risk and care planning, and ensuring lessons were learned and used to drive improvement.

Managers ensured staff received appropriate training and supervision to deliver safe and effective care. Staff described a poor culture within the service and low morale among the team. Managers were aware of these issues and were committed to working with staff to address them. Staff felt supported to provide feedback about improvements and believed action would follow.