The Care Quality Commission
  • Community
  • Community substance misuse service

Archived: New Directions Bradford Also known as Change, Grow, Live

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

30 Manningham Lane, Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD1 3DN (01274) 296023

Provided and run by:
Change, Grow, Live

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

4-5 May 2022

During a routine inspection

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as outstanding because:

  • The service operated a holistic approach to delivering care and treatment. Staff worked with local tissue viability nurses to establish a referral process and develop new consent to share forms. Staff will be able to photograph wounds and send them to the nurses for advice instead of waiting for them to visit the service.
  • Staff were proactively supported and encouraged to acquire new skills, use their transferable skills, and share best practice. Staff had utilised their training and knowledge to administer Naloxone to clients and members of the public who had been found unresponsive. One of the staff involved received a police bravery award for their actions in saving a person’s life.
  • Managers proactively recruited, trained and supported volunteers to work with clients in the service. A client who had come through the integrated offender management system successfully completed the service’s volunteer programme. Clients had fed back to the service how helpful it had been to speak with someone who had lived similar experiences as them.
  • Staff had excellent working relationships with external partners and agencies. Staff worked collaboratively and had found effective ways to deliver joined-up care and treatment. included a ‘one stop shop’ with partner agencies at a church, which provided a safe and inclusive space for clients and the homeless community to speak with multiple agencies.
  • The service had acted quickly in response to trends identified during the COVID-19 pandemic. This included distributing kits and providing training on administering Naloxone in hostels across Bradford, and significantly increasing the number of mobile phones given to clients.
  • Former clients had become staff members and were actively involved in making decisions about the service. People who used the service were active partners in their care and staff empowered them to have a voice.
  • Feedback from clients, family members and carers was overwhelmingly positive. There was a strong, visible, person-centred culture at the service. Staff knew the clients well and all observed interactions were kind and respectful.
  • The service provided safe care. The premises were clean and staff followed infection control guidelines. The service had enough staff. Staff received regular supervisions, an annual appraisal and a comprehensive induction to the service. They received specialist training for their role, which was effectively utilised.
  • Systems were in place to prioritise clients according to risk. Clients had detailed risk management plans and risk assessments in place, which were regularly reviewed and up to date. Staff knew how to recognise adults and children at risk of or suffering harm.
  • Managers and senior staff had a very good understanding of the service they managed. They were visible in the service and approachable for clients and staff.
  • Staff felt supported in their role and proud to work for the service. There were opportunities for progression within the service and wider organisation. Staff felt comfortable raising concerns and were confident their concerns would be taken seriously.
  • Effective systems and processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service. Managers and senior staff reviewed performance data to identify any themes and trends.

However:

  • Not all consultation rooms were adequately sound proofed.

20-21 November 2018

During a routine inspection

We rated New Directions Bradford as requires improvement because:

  • There were areas of improvement required to manage safety in the service. Not all clients had an individual risk assessment. Risk assessments were not consistently fully completed to evidence that all risks had been considered. Where risk assessments had been completed it was not clear how staff planned to manage identified risks effectively. Staff had not identified environmental risks in client accessible areas. Not all staff had received the required mandatory training to ensure they could respond to physical health emergencies.
  • The service was not consistently providing effective care. Whilst the service offered a full range of interventions these were not reflected in recovery plans. Recovery plans did not meet the individual needs of each client including their physical, psychological and social needs. Staff did not record discharge plans or clients’ individually agreed plans for unexpected exit from treatment. Staff did not have a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act. Records did not support that staff consistently received supervision.

However:

  • Staff were caring. Feedback from clients and carers was consistently positive about staff attitudes. All clients had a named recovery coordinator who acted as a point of contact for the service. The service had access to a range of interventions to support clients and those close to them. Families and carers were appropriately involved in clients’ treatment. Staff understood and addressed specific needs regarding equality, diversity and human rights.
  • The service was providing care in a way that was responsive to people’s needs. All locations had accessible client areas including clinic rooms and interview rooms. Staff were flexible with appointment times and locations and appointments were rarely cancelled. Staff could make reasonable adjustments to support additional client needs. The service ensured that clients knew how make a complaint and was responsive to feedback.
  • The service was well-led. There was a stable management team with managers at all levels who had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles. Managers and team leaders were visible in service and staff told us that managers were approachable. All staff we spoke with told us that they felt respected, supported and valued. There were good systems and processes in place to assess and monitor quality and safety within the service. Managers had identified and had plans in place to address most areas of concern.