Musgrove Park Hospital

Updated 4 September 2026

Somerset NHS Foundation Trust merged with Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust in April 2023. Somerset NHS Foundation Trust runs acute hospital services, community services, mental health and learning disability services and a quarter of Somerset’s GP practices. It runs services from 2 acute hospitals: Musgrove Park Hospital in Taunton and Yeovil District Hospital in Yeovil.

In May 2025 Somerset NHS Foundation Trust temporarily closed the maternity unit at Yeovil District Hospital due to safety concerns regarding staffing. Therefore, we conducted an unannounced, comprehensive on-site inspection of maternity services at Musgrove Park Hospital.

At this assessment we assessed all quality statements in the safe, effective, responsive, caring and well-led domains. We found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding, medicines management and environment.

However, we found maternity services had improved from inadequate to requires improvement. We found most of the issues in the Warning Notice had been addressed.

Updated 28 November 2025

Date of on-site assessment: 23 - 26 February 2026.

We conducted a comprehensive inspection of maternity services at Musgrove Park Hospital including community midwifery services provided by Somerset NHS Foundation Trust.

At our last focused inspection of Somerset NHS Foundation Trust maternity services in November 2023, we looked at elements of safe and well led and maternity services were rated inadequate. We issued a warning notice to improve the safety of women using maternity services at both Yeovil Hospital and Musgrove Park Hospital.

At this assessment we assessed all quality statements in the safe, effective, responsive, caring and well-led key questions. We found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment.

Maternity services at Musgrove Park Hospital included antenatal clinic, scheduled care, triage, labour ward, theatre, procedure room, antenatal ward (Fern ward) post-natal ward (Willow ward), transitional care, bracken birth centre (which is a midwifery led birthing unit within the hospital), bereavement suite and community midwifery services.

We found maternity services had improved from inadequate to requires improvement. We found the issues in the Warning Notice pertaining to Musgrove Park Hospital had been addressed.

The number of births recorded from April 2025 to February 2026 for Musgrove Park Hospital was 4,314.

Updated 31 October 2024

Date of assessment 13 January to 11 February 2025.  

We carried out this assessment as a focused responsive inspection due to new and emerging risk using the Single Assessment Framework (SAF). We assessed three key questions; safe, effective and well led, and have combined the scores for these areas with scores from the last inspection to give the rating. Our rating of this location stayed the same.  

We rated it Good because the trust provided a safe, effective and well led service for children and young people. 

The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. 

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. People always had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved people who were important and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity. 

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas. There were effective governance processes. The service had systems to manage staff performance effectively. They were proactive in identifying and escalating risks, they held up to date risk registers and took prompt action to minimise their impact. 

Updated 24 March 2020

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and mostly managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients most, acted on them and kept good care records most of the time. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff consistently treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• Nurse staffing levels in the four-bed high dependency respiratory area did not always meet the trust policy, specifically at night, although a business case had been submitted to address this.
• Although this had improved since our last inspection, when this was an area of concern, some emergency equipment was still not consistently checked on a daily basis in all areas.
• Staff were not compliant with the target for updating some mandatory training modules.
• The service was not meeting the NHS constitutional standards for treating patients on time in a number of specialties and over a number of years. This was not improving.

Updated 24 March 2020

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff mostly had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service mostly controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff consistently treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• There were concerns surrounding the environment and equipment. The critical care unit was situated within ageing buildings so the environment was complex to manage. There was unrestricted access to the unit (although this was resolved shortly after our inspection). There was unrestricted access to some equipment cupboards where locks had been damaged.

Updated 5 December 2017

A summary of this service appears in the Overall summary.

Updated 5 December 2017

A summary of this service appears in the Overall summary.

Updated 5 December 2017

Updated 5 December 2017