Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We assessed a total of 4 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question is Good. The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respect their privacy and dignity. They promoted people’s independence, so they knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. The service supported staff to enable them to deliver person centred care. Staff reported supportive teams, had good relationships with colleagues and felt valued.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People informed us that they were happy on the wards and the staff were very helpful. Carers informed us that staff were caring, knowledgeable and empathetic. However, some carers believed that the communication from the wards could be improved. All carers knew how to raise concerns or complaints to the service.

Staff were able to tell us how they would maintain patients’ dignity and how to deal with complaints. Staff informed us that the wards had community meetings where patients could input into the ward. Staff told us that activities would be cancelled due to staffing levels on the wards and that there were limited activities on the weekend due to the availability of the occupational therapist. Activities offered to patients were pamper sessions, arts and crafts, gardening and pet therapy.

There were no concerns raised by partner organisations.

We observed staff providing care on the wards, they were engaging and friendly. We observed staff speaking with patients about their day and their interest. However, there were times where patients were sat in a lounge in silence with no staff or engagement. We visited Cherry ward on an evening visit and observed staff delivering care. We found limited staff interactions with patients. We observed patients needing help with activities and staff not assisting. There was very little engagement with patients, the patients sat in the lounge were left alone with the TV on.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Patients had no specific feedback on this area. Carers informed us that they were able to visit their relatives frequently. Although visits mainly took place in the visiting room, carers informed us of times they had been able to visit their relative on the ward due to the patient's circumstances.

Staff were able to share information in different formats and or support patients in different environments depending upon need. There were centralised resources staff could access to provide patients with information relating to treatment and recovery. Interpreters could also be accessed when necessary. Staff also had a solid understanding of the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act and were able to provide advice and support to patients that protected their rights.

We observed a multidisciplinary team meeting for a patient, this meeting was patient focused and took into account the risk and the wellbeing of the patients. We found evidence of best interest decisions talking place for patients who required them with involvement from relatives and relevant professionals. We found evidence of regular involvement of occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and other required specialities such as opticians and dentists.

Appropriate systems were in place to support those with additional needs accessing services. Sufficient resources were easily accessible to provide appropriate information to patients. Interpreters were accessible across all sites as was advocacy.

Patients had no specific feedback on this area. Carers knew how to raise any concerns they had with the wards.

Staff were knowledgeable about the patient and carer complaints process. Staff were aware of any specific care and or communication needs of patients. Handover meetings highlighted any change in risk or needs for patients to staff on duty.

We observed staff providing care and responding to people’s needs appropriately. We observed staff engaging patients to ascertain their needs. Care records demonstrated staff responding to physical care needs for patients.

There were appropriate systems and guidance in place to support staff in responding to immediate patient need. These included effective handovers and care plans for staff to follow.

Staff informed us that they were happy in their teams and felt respected and valued by their colleagues.

Appropriate policies were in place to promote staff wellbeing and access to support. All staff were able to provide feedback through an annual staff survey.