Churchview Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

People said they knew who the registered manager was. Their comments included, “I know [Registered manager], [they] come in here occasionally. I find [them] sociable and will stop and have a chat. [They are] a polite [person]. if you have a problem, [they] will listen to what you are saying”, “I have met all the managers that have been here and I have written a report on the website too” and “I do know the current manager and [they] come to see me occasionally.” A relative added, “I’ve met the manager, [they] always say hello. The staff are all very nice.”

The management team told us they ensured the staff were valued and promoted people’s individuality, protected their rights and enabled them to thrive. The registered manager stated, “There has been a lot of work in the last couple of years. Full refurbishment of the home. Physio and rehab to continue. We want to build on the community café for the community. We want to get an electric bus for people. We get a lot of referrals as a care provider. We potentially would like to expand our capacity, expand our clinical team, get more training, we like face-to-face training.”

Staff told us there was a good and positive culture within the home where people and staff had a good rapport, and the atmosphere was one of respect and care. They told us, “Staff morale is generally good. We work well as a team and support one another” and “Staff morale is good. Team members support each other and there is good communication within the team.”

The provider set a culture that valued reflection, learning and improvement. The registered manager effectively used staff supervision and regular team meetings as a platform for staff to raise any concerns and an opportunity to share their views and opinions.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The registered manager had experience of working in health and social care. They were keen on developing the home to benefit people and the staff team. They received support from their line manager and had a good relationship with them.

Staff found the management team to be visible and supportive. They thought the registered manager was an experienced leader who was respected by all. Their comments included, “I find the manager approachable. [They] encourage open communication and listen to staff”, “My manager is approachable. I feel comfortable speaking with [them] about concerns, asking for support and discussing work-related issues openly” and “The manager is approachable, supportive, and treats staff fairly and professionally.”

There were regular team meetings and management meetings where a range of subjects were discussed and information was shared.

In addition to team meetings, there were daily handover meetings to discuss important information, and any risks to service delivery. There were processes to support managers and senior staff in meeting their responsibilities.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

People were given information when they moved to the home about how to raise a concern and said they knew how to make a complaint.

Staff said they knew about the provider’s whistleblowing policy and would not hesitate to use this to benefit staff and people living at the home. One staff member told us, “The whistleblowing procedure is available on our system and there is a poster up in the staff room. It means staff can report unsafe practice, abuse or concerns without fear of repercussion.”

The provider had processes in place to support staff to speak up. This included supervision meetings, handover meetings, staff meetings and a whistleblowing policy. Staff had also received training in safeguarding to reinforce their understanding and their responsibility to speak up. The registered manager added, “There is a suggestion box available in the staff room. They can comment anonymously. We act on concerns as soon as possible. There is a good culture now. Our policies are shared, Staff have contact details of CQC, the local authority and local ombudsman. Information is displayed in the staff room and reception area.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff told us they enjoyed working in a diverse team. All staff had a good understanding of the English language and there were no reported language barriers.

The provider had policies to promote equality, diversity and inclusion and to protect staff from discrimination and harassment.

Staff who had healthcare needs were supported appropriately. The registered manager told us they met with them regularly to establish how they were feeling and how they could meet their needs within the workplace.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They always acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

Staff told us they felt supported and valued by the registered manager who was available whenever they needed them. Staff said they were supported to keep up to date with the care people required.

The provider had processes to monitor the quality of the service and these were mostly effective. Although audits had not identified the minor shortfalls we found during the inspection, these was promptly rectified and appropriate actions were taken to make the audits more robust.

The provider undertook regular audits of all areas of the service. Audits included, accidents and incidents, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), health and safety checks, fire checks, medicines and care plans. DoLSensures people who cannot consent to their care arrangements in a care home or hospital are protected if those arrangements deprive them of their liberty.

The service manager regularly visited the service and worked alongside the registered manager to undertake visual checks of every area of the home. They also supported them with any areas for improvement.

The registered manager was passionate about their role. They worked well with their colleagues and other partners to develop the service, build a team and work together to meet the needs of people who use the service.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

Staff told us they worked well with healthcare professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. The registered manager confirmed they had a good working relationship with a range of external professionals.

The provider had systems and processes to ensure people’s needs were reviewed with external professionals. The provider listened to feedback from them and where a need was identified, amended their policies and procedures to promote effective communication and partnership working.

The provider had a strong focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They always encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The provider had developed a dementia strategy, the purpose of this was to create a framework through which people living with dementia could be supported in a way that was cohesive, person-centred, clinically reasoned, and capable of being translated into daily care. The home had a number of ‘champions’, who were specific staff members focused on a specific area of care, such as dementia care, skin integrity and falls.

As part of the dementia strategy, the dementia champion had undertaken a study into the impact of using aromatherapy on people. This study was conducted on a group of people living with dementia and the use of 3 particular oils, known for their therapeutic properties. The study found a consistent improvement in people’s emotional wellbeing, hydration and weight-gain. Visitors had also reported a calmer environment. The result of this study was published in a well-known magazine. As a result, the home had implemented regular use of aromatherapy within the home to benefit people.

The provider had also launched a ‘Memory Café’ which operated once a week. This provided support, friendly conversation and companionship for people living with dementia, their families and carers. In addition, champions were given 10-minute chairing platforms, allowing them to contribute to the forum in a visible and structured way. This meant champions were seen as active carriers of the culture. The provider stated, “Promotional thinking extended to GP surgeries, churches, community boards, local press, local authorities, social workers, and other public-facing venues.”

The registered manager told us they listened to people’s feedback to make improvements. They had an action plan in place which was regularly reviewed and updated as actions were taken. We saw evidence of this during our visit.

Staff told us the managers were always aiming to make improvements to the service to benefit people, and they enjoyed being part of this and felt consulted and involved.