Rated Care Homes

Rose Hill Nursing Home

G

Good

Rated on

Rating from the Care Quality Commission.

At a glance

  • 4 ratings

    First rated Good in 2016, most recently Good in July 2026.

  • 3 months

    since the latest rating was published.

  • 234 of 302

    rated care homes in Surrey are rated Good, like this one.

Rose Hill Nursing Home: inspection record

Care home with nursing, 35 beds, Surrey

Rated Good in July 2026.

Rose Hill Nursing Home: inspection record: inspection ratings by year, 2015 to 2026
201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
Overall
Safe
Effective
Caring
Responsive
Well-led

Ratings published by the Care Quality Commission.

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Tuscany House Good, 0.3 miles away
  2. –
    Garth House Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
  3. G
    Nower House Good, 0.5 miles away
  4. RI
    Deepdene Care Centre Requires improvement, 0.5 miles away
  5. G
    Dorking Manor Good, 0.6 miles away

See all care homes in Surrey

See all care homes in Dorking

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 9 July 2026 (assessment visit 8 April 2026). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

We visited the service on 21 May 2026. This assessment took place in response to the length of We identified a breach of legal regulation relating to good governance. We have requested an action plan in response to these concerns. time since our last inspection.

  • Safe Good
  • Effective Good
  • Caring Good
  • Responsive Good
  • Well-led No rating
Read the rest of CQC's summary

Rose Hill nursing home is a care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 28 people, some of whom were living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 27 people living at the service.

At our last inspection in July and August 2019, we rated the service good overall and in all key questions apart from well-led which was rated requires improvement. At this inspection, we found some shortfalls in relation to the governance of the service.

The provider’s monitoring systems had failed to identify shortfalls in the management of medicines. They had also not identified that people’s records such as risk assessments were not always in place, reviewed or updated. there was a risk that failure to maintain accurate, complete and contemporaneous records may result in people receiving inappropriate care and support because staff may not have correct and up to date information to meet people’s needs.

Staffing levels were overall adequate to meet people’s needs and staff retention was good.

The staff received training in the Mental Capacity Act and understood the principles of this and how it related to people who lived at the service.

There were good systems to protect people from the risk of infection and cross contamination, and staff followed good practice. There were systems in place for the safe recruitment of staff. Overall, people were cared for by staff who were kind and caring and knew them well. The service was clean, fresh and well-maintained.

People were supported to undertake a range of activities of their choice and were involved in the planning of these. People and their relatives were involved in their pre-admission assessment, care planning and the management of individual risks. Staff received regular training and had their competencies checked. People’s end of life wishes had been considered and documented. Staff spoke favourably of the management team and felt listened to and consulted.

The provider was in breach of the legal regulation relating to good governance. We are requesting an action plan in relation to this.

  1. Safe

    Good

    Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

    This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  2. Effective

    Good

    Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

    This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

  3. Caring

    Good

    Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

    This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

  4. Responsive

    Good

    Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

    At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

    This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

  5. Well-led

    No rating

    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 remained requires improvement.

    This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

    The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.

Questions to ask when you visit

  1. Well-led was rated Requires improvement on 9 July 2026. Ask about changes in management and what has changed since the report.
  2. Ask how nursing cover works at night and at weekends.
  3. Ask to see the most recent Care Quality Commission (CQC) report and what the home did about any points in it.

Registration details

Registered manager
Patricia Grimwood
Registered with the CQC since
What it provides
Care home service with nursing
Who it supports
Dementia, Older People, Younger Adults

Inspection report

Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

9 inspection reports, latest 10 March 2022. Latest assessment published 9 July 2026; the Care Quality Commission's newer assessments are published on its website rather than as reports.

The rating is the Care Quality Commission's. We show it as published and do not change it.

Who runs it

Ownership type
Organisation
Companies House number
03938158 (opens Companies House)

Getting help from Surrey County Council

The council can assess what care someone needs and tell them what help with the cost they may get.

Checked on the council's website, November 2026.

Common questions

Does Rose Hill Nursing Home provide nursing care?
Yes. The Care Quality Commission lists Rose Hill Nursing Home as a care home with nursing.
How many beds does Rose Hill Nursing Home have?
The Care Quality Commission's register lists 35 beds at Rose Hill Nursing Home.
When was Rose Hill Nursing Home last inspected?
The Care Quality Commission's latest rating for Rose Hill Nursing Home was published on 9 July 2026.
Who runs Rose Hill Nursing Home?
Rose Hill Nursing Home is run by Rosehill (UK) Limited.
What is Rose Hill Nursing Home's CQC rating?
Its overall rating from the Care Quality Commission is Good, published on 9 July 2026.

Contact

Phone
01306 882622
Address
9 Rose Hill, Dorking, RH4 2EG Map (opens Google Maps)
Read the full inspection report (opens the Care Quality Commission website)

Compare nearby

  1. G
    Tuscany House Good, 0.3 miles away
  2. –
    Garth House Not yet rated, 0.4 miles away
  3. G
    Nower House Good, 0.5 miles away
  4. RI
    Deepdene Care Centre Requires improvement, 0.5 miles away
  5. G
    Dorking Manor Good, 0.6 miles away

See all care homes in Surrey

See all care homes in Dorking