We carried out a review of the data available to us about Church View on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Church View, you can give feedback on this service.
People living at Church View had multiple and complex physical and learning disabilities. Staff provided extraordinary care by exploring ways to engage people to maximise their full potential.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service:
¿Outcomes for people were consistently better than expected because staff worked tirelessly to make sure, people had opportunities to lead as full a life as possible.
¿ Through people’s own communication strategies, their suggestions and ideas were sought, valued and included to plan their activities. People took responsibility for daily tasks because staff recognised this gave people a sense of ownership and satisfaction.
¿. Staff worked extremely closely with people to learn and improve people’s communications. This was central to help people achieve their full potential which resulted in improvements to people’s health and wellbeing.
¿Staff and relatives spoke overwhelmingly of the positive support, guidance and healthcare interventions people had received. Relatives were full of praise for the staff in terms of their kindness, compassion, patience and abilities. Relatives described the care as exceptional and without compromise.
¿ There was strong evidence that showed what worked well and how continuous improvement enhanced people’s individual skills and personalities. Our observations and how people were around staff, demonstrated they felt safe with everyone at Church View.
¿The provider encouraged and empowered people and staff to have the confidence to suggest innovative and creative solutions to see risks in a positive way, rather than a reason to stop someone doing what they wanted. The registered manager and staff promoted a culture and team spirit to say, ‘anything was possible’.
¿People and relatives were involved in the planning of their care and regular and timely reviews made sure the care continued to meet people’s needs and expectations.
¿People had very good access to internal and external health care professionals when required.
¿Staff training was personalised around the people they supported and was specific to meet people’s needs. Staff were supported by the provider who invested well in their training and valued their feedback.
¿Feedback from people, staff, management and other healthcare professionals demonstrated a strong sense of ‘family’ and a ‘homely feel’.
¿Staff were proud of the work they did and were fully committed to ensuring people were at the centre of everything that took place. Staff responses and how they spoke about people in a caring, gentle and respectful way, showed they cared about them, wanting to do their best for them.
¿The registered manager and staff were constantly researching new ideas to improve people's quality of life and access new communication methods.
¿Assistive and innovative technologies were used creatively to further enhance people’s communication. People's aspirations were explored with them, matched by care plans that focussed more on dreams, goals and objectives.
¿The registered manager and extended management team offered strong leadership. They were committed to continually drive performance and learn from real life situations and CQC inspections. A programme of audits by the provider included internal inspections that reported actions in line with our key lines of enquiries.
¿Staff focussed on delivering the same expected high standards and shared values. The management team told us they saw themselves as an integral part to facilitate improved learning and were proud that other services within the organisation were rated outstanding.
We found the service met the characteristics of an “Outstanding” rating in three areas and “Good” in two areas; For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good. The last report for Church View was published on 19 February 2016.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The previous ‘good’ service provided to people had been developed and enhanced by a staff team who embraced and sought new techniques. As a result, the rating has changed to Outstanding.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
The inspection was carried out on 20 January 2016 and was unannounced.
Church View is registered to provide accommodation with personal care needs to six people who have a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. There were six people living at the home on the day of the inspection. The house is situated in the village of Longnor in Shropshire.
There was a registered manager in post who was present during the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People who lived at the home and their relatives told us they felt safe as there was always enough of staff available to support them.
Staff were able to recognise signs of abuse and knew who to report any concerns to. The provider carried out necessary checks to ensure staff were safe and suitable to work at the home prior to them starting work there.
Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and guidelines put in place to enable people to follow their interests and promote their independence.
People were supported to take their medicines by staff. People’s medicines were stored safely and accurate records maintained. Staff had received training to ensure they were competent and confident to give people their medicines.
People were supported by motivated and well trained staff. The registered manager provided effective leadership and worked as part of the team to enable people to work towards their aspirations.
Staff used people’s preferred method of communication to enable them to understand and be involved in decisions about their care. Where people were unable to make certain decisions staff would ensure that decisions made on their behalf would be in their best interest.
People were encouraged to choose and help prepare their own meals and drinks where able. People’s nutrional needs were assessed monitored and reviewed to ensure their dietary needs were met.
People were encouraged and supported to keep in contact with family and friends. Relatives we spoke with told us they were always made to feel welcome when they visited the home.
People were supported to make choices about how they received their care and treatment. Care plans were tailored to peoples’ individual needs and preferences.
Staff treated people with dignity and respect. People were supported to remain as independent as possible and staff encouraged them to pursue their interests and hobbies.
People and their relatives knew how to raise concerns and were confident that their concerns would be listened to and acted upon.
Both the provider and registered manager completed a range of checks to monitor the quality of the service and to identify if improvements were required. They were keen to develop the service and actively sought feedback from people who used the service, their relatives and staff to drive improvements.