Roseberry Park

We spoke with approximately 24 people who use the service, unfortunately people did not have any visitors during our inspection and therefore we were unable to talk with family members and advocates, however we observed how people were cared for, talked with staff and other health professionals and looked at people's records to ensure people were appropriately cared for.

People who use the service talked positively about their experience at Roseberry Park. People told us they were involved in the planning of their care and were also involved in reviews of their progress. People made comments to us such as " the staff are supportive and make the best decisions for me", "The staff are really good I get on with most of them" and "I am involved in my care and feel like my opinions matter." Some people did not make positive comments about the service and told us 'staff are overprotective' and 'It's like a prison.'

We looked at how people's care needs were met and considered whether care was safe and appropriate. Although we found many good practices such as people being involved in their care and being supported with alternative methods of communication where this was required, we did find that care was not always planned effectively and staff did not always follow the instructions in people's care plans.

We focused our inspection in areas where we identified concerns during our visit, such as seclusion and restrictions. We found that seclusion was used on occasions to manage complex behaviours rather than manage disturbed behaviour, which could cause serious harm to others or the person concerned. We also found there were a number of excessive and unjustified restrictions in place such as staff monitoring personal visits and phone calls on a routine rather than case by case basis. Appropriate risk assessments had not been completed to demonstrate why restrictions were in place and what the person needed to do to have restrictions removed.

We looked at how people were protected from the risks of abuse and found that the provider had not taken steps to ensure people were protected from the risks of abuse. We found processes to ensure seclusion was not used excessively were inadequate, and we also found restrictions placed on people were not adequately reviewed to ensure people were protected from abuse.

We spoke with people who use the service and asked if they felt safe in Roseberry Park. People told us that they knew how to report incidents of abuse and also knew how to raise any concerns if they had too. People were aware of the services they could contact if they felt abused or vulnerable, such as local advocacy services, the local safeguarding team and the CQC.

We spoke with the majority of patients on the two wards we visited offering forensic low secure services for people on the autism spectrum. In addition we spoke with the relatives of two people who used the service. We also spoke with three people who had been discharged from the service within the last year.

Overall, we found people's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

We found that people were cared for in accordance with their needs. Risk assessments were carried out and appropriate care plans were written to manage risks. These were kept up to date because they were reviewed regularly. We found that people had their comments and complaints listened to and acted on, without the fear that they would be discriminated against for making a complaint.