Church Farm at Field House

Updated 27 April 2026

About the service

Church Farm at Field House, is a care home with nursing. There were 47 people using the service at the time of the assessment.

Who the service is for

The service supports adults of all ages.

We carried out this assessment on 15 June 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.

People told us they felt safe, and relatives also expressed confidence that their loved ones were safe. There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people's needs safely, and staff demonstrated the appropriate skills, knowledge, and experience to provide effective support. Throughout our observations, staff consistently treated people with kindness, and respect.

There were effective systems in place to safeguard people from abuse. Medicines were administered safely.

There were governance and management systems in place. Auditing systems were used, with regular audits completed to enable the management team to maintain oversight of the service and identify areas for improvement. The provider had communication systems, including regular ‘flash meetings’, which brought together staff from different roles to share information.

Risks were assessed and staff knew people well. However, some care plans were missing, and others lacked clear guidance on supporting people with specific health conditions. This was fed back during the onsite visit, and the provider told us they had updated the care plans. We observed the environment was not always safe we fed this back during out visit and the management team took immediate action.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. DoLS authorisations were appropriately applied for and overseen. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions, they had choice, control and freedom over their lives.

Updated 27 April 2026

We carried out observations and spoke with people and those important to them, including relatives, to assess their experiences of care.

People told us they felt safe, and people important to them also told us their loved ones were safe. One relative said, “I’ve no safety concerns at all. The staff create a worry-free environment which gives us confidence that [family member] is in a safe place.”

We were told safeguarding incidents were managed appropriately. One relative told us. “There was a safeguarding issue. The manager handled this instance well and the nurse acted promptly when the situation was realised. There have been no similar instances.”

During our visit, health professionals visited the service to provide clinical support and advice. One person who was unwell had been added to the ‘ward round’ to ensure they received a timely review and support. One relative told us, “If [family member] becomes unwell the GP is alerted and attends swiftly. We like this as it’s a very safe feature.”

Relatives spoke positively about the nursing care their loved ones received. One relative told us, “The registered nurses are terrific and lovely. They give me confidence along with the manager that this is a very safe nursing home. I don’t worry about my [family member] being in this home.”

Whilst we received mixed feedback about whether people or their relatives had access to, or had read, their care plans, people told us they had been informed of any changes. One relative said, “I’ve asked a few times to see the care plan, but I don’t recall ever seeing such a document. I am contacted however with updates on my [family member].” Another relative told us, “Once a month the home calls me to review [family members] care. They give very clear answers to questions.”

Mealtimes were observed to be well organised and responsive. People were offered choice and alternatives if they did not want any of the options offered. People and relatives told us the food was of good quality. One person told us, “Yes, the food is ok and you get a choice.”. A relative told us, “The food looks good to me and if I’m here at lunch I’m offered a meal.” We observed a family member being asked by staff if they would like anything to eat.

We observed staff sought consent before they provided support. Cognition care plans were in place and recorded where people lacked capacity, this included any best-interest decisions made on their behalf.

We observed staff treating people with kindness, compassion and dignity. People told us staff respected them and treated them well. One person told us, “It’s very caring, very inclusive and I am very satisfied.”

We received mixed feedback about the activities available and whether people had choices in how they spent their time in a meaningful way.