- Homecare service
Lifeways Community Care (Taunton)
Assessment report published 8 September 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 24 June to 23 July 2026. The service is a supported living service providing personal care to people living across a number of supported living settings. At the time of this assessment, the service supported 21 people with the regulated activity of personal care.
We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted.
We carried out this assessment in response to previous enforcement action.
The provider had made significant improvements since the last assessment. The provider was no longer in breach of regulations concerning safe care and treatment, consent, dignity and respect and governance.
We found governance systems had improved, audits were more focused and actions were clearer. Incident analysis was being used to identify themes and trends, and staff were able to describe changes made as a result of learning. There had also been a reduction in agency staff use, which had helped improve consistency of care and reduced risks linked to information-sharing between permanent and agency staff.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and the culture within the service was positive. Where people lacked capacity to make decisions, the provider followed the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 code of practice.
People were protected from the risk of harm as staff had all the information needed to meet people's needs safely. Many relatives and professionals described staff as kind, caring and knowledgeable about people’s needs. We saw examples of people being supported to access healthcare, take part in activities, maintain relationships and develop independence. Staff also gave examples of person-centred support and told us they felt able to raise concerns.
People were being supported by enough staff who had been recruited safely. The provider supported staff wellbeing. The registered manager was open and responsive, taking action before the assessment ended.
People's experience of this service
People and relatives gave mixed but generally positive feedback about their experience of care and support. Most people were supported by staff who knew them well, understood their communication needs and preferences, and treated them with kindness and respect. Relatives told us people were comfortable with staff, enjoyed positive relationships and were supported to live meaningful lives.
The service supported people with a learning disability and autistic people. Records and feedback showed staff used a range of communication approaches to help people express their wishes and make decisions about their care. People were supported to make everyday choices about activities, meals, clothing and how they spent their time. Staff gave examples of adapting support to people’s individual needs and communication preferences to promote involvement and independence.
Relatives told us people were safe and well cared for. Families described staff as caring, attentive and responsive when concerns arose. People were supported to access healthcare services. We found examples of people being supported to attend appointments, access specialist services and maintain their health and wellbeing.
People were encouraged to take part in activities that were meaningful to them and maintain relationships with family and friends. Relatives described people accessing holidays, swimming, shopping, meals out, community activities, social events and visits with family members. Records showed staff supported people to develop skills, pursue personal goals and increase their independence.
Many relatives spoke positively about stable staff teams and said people benefited from support from staff who knew them well. However, some relatives raised concerns about inconsistent communication and the use of unfamiliar staff who might not always understand people’s individual needs and communication methods.
The provider had identified the need to strengthen engagement with people and families and was introducing smaller local forums to encourage greater participation and feedback. Overall, people were often supported by caring staff who knew them well and promoted choice, independence and inclusion, although further work was needed to embed and sustain the improvement at the service.