22 March 2022 23 March 2022
During a routine inspection
Our rating of this location stayed the same. We rated it as requires improvement because:
- The ward environments were not always safe or clean and staff were not always following guidance in relation to infection control.
- The premises did not always promote privacy and dignity for all patients.
- Staff on Cedar and Maple wards did not consistently assess and manage risk well.
- Although staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided, audits were not always effective in identifying issues.
- Not all checks following rapid tranquilisation were accurately recorded on Cedar ward.
- Not all care plans on Maple ward were comprehensive.
- Care plans did not accurately reflect the assessed physical health needs of all patients
- Staff did not always understand and discharge their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
- Not all staff had received up to date supervision or had access to regular team meetings.
- Our findings from the other key questions demonstrated that governance processes did not always operate effectively at team level and that performance and risk were not always managed well.
- Staff did not always feel respected or valued.
However:
- The wards had enough nurses and doctors. They minimised the use of restrictive practices and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
- In the main staff developed recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the patients and in line with national guidance about best practice.
- The ward teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of patients on the wards. Managers ensured that these staff received training and appraisals.
- Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood the individual needs of patients. They actively involved patients and families and carers in care decisions.
- Staff planned and managed discharge well and liaised with services that would provide aftercare. As a result, discharge was rarely delayed for other than a clinical reason.