Churchview Care Services (Taunton)

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

We received mixed feedback from staff regarding the management of the service. Most of the feedback we received from staff about the registered manager was positive. However, some staff commented on the turnover of managers and vacant senior posts. The registered manager had been in post since 2022, however there had been changes in team leader positions in the supported living services, which impacted on the service people received.

The systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service had improved; however, they had not identified some of the issues we found with people’s risk assessments. A service action plan was in place which incorporated actions identified through these systems.

The registered manager had oversight of the actions required and was working with the provider and other members of the team to implement these.

This service scored 57 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We received mixed feedback relating to the management of the service. Most of the staff we spoke with told us they felt supported. However, some staff commented on the changes to the management team and the gaps in senior roles. One staff member told us, “I feel supported, I get enough support from the manager.” However, 1 staff member said, “There have been so many [managers], there has been no consistency.”

Most of the staff spoke positively about the registered manager. One staff member told us, “[Name of registered manager] is very approachable, they listen, I have their number, they are accessible. I feel supported, any questions I reach out and they respond.” Some staff still felt they needed to get to know the registered manager. One staff member told us, “I don’t know them, I have seen them a handful of times in passing.”

We discussed the concerns relating to the management of the service with the management registered manager and provider who acknowledged there had been some inconsistencies in the management team. The registered manager and provider provided assurances regarding the current management structure in place.

The registered manager and provider told us that a decision had been made for the registered manager to solely be responsible for overseeing Churchview Care Services (Taunton). The registered manager was positive about this decision, as they had previously been overseeing the service as well as one of the providers other services.

Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities. One staff member told us, “We have a much better understanding of our roles as support staff now.”

The registered manager and provider told us there were some senior staff vacancies which they were actively recruiting to.

At the last inspection in October 2023, we identified a breach of Regulation 17 (Good governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Systems and processes were not operated effectively to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service. At this assessment there had been improvements in the systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service, and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 17. However, there were still further improvements needed to ensure the systems were fully effective and embedded into the service.

There were a range of audits and checks carried out by the provider and registered manager. Audits included, people’s finances, incidents and accidents, medicines, care plans, health and safety, staff and service user meetings. The audits identified areas of improvement and had action plans; however, they had not identified some of the issues we had found with people’s risk assessments.

A service action plan was in place which incorporated actions identified through these systems.

The registered manager also completed checks on staffs’ interactions and support provided to people to ensure it was person centred and in line with their care plans.

The registered manager had a clear oversight of the actions required and was working with the provider and other members of the team to implement these.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Although the systems in place to support learning had not always been effective, it was evident from our conversations with the registered manager and provider that they had learned from past experiences and were making improvements in the service. They acknowledged there had been concerns with the service in the past. They were focused on learning from this and moving the service forward, we saw evidence of the service’s improvement.

Staff told us they discussed any learning as a team. One staff member commented, “We have monthly meetings where we discuss everything that happened in the month, we bring up all issues that need to be addressed. I feel able to speak up.” Another staff member told us, “We use team meetings, a shared platform for notes, and regular emails. These systems are effective, especially for staying updated on shifts or policy changes.”

The registered manager adopted a culture of learning, they told us they were committed to improving the service and providing a good quality, person centred service.

The registered manager had worked with the staff team to improve the culture. Staff confirmed this. One staff member told us, “The culture has definitely improved, we have a much better understanding of our roles, we support people to do what they want to, it’s a healthier attitude.”

There were processes in place to support learning and improvement. Due to the turnover of staff and managers these had not always been effective in ensuring learning and improvements were implemented. However, with the registered manager and consistent staff team in place it was apparent that recent learning had been implemented and improvements made.

The registered manager had made appropriate referrals to professionals to review people’s needs, where they thought the service was not currently meeting the person’s needs.

The registered manager arranged a ‘coffee and chat’ meeting for people and relatives to enable them to give feedback. Relatives’ meetings had also been held; an action plan had been created from this.

Staff meetings were also held to enable staff to give and receive feedback and share any learning.