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

All patients and carers reported staff treated them with kindness and respect and all observations of care showed patients being treated with kindness and compassion. Staff knew patients well and so felt able to identify and respond quickly to changes in their wellbeing. Patients were also supported appropriately to allow them to make decisions about their 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.

All patients and carers reported that staff were kind and respectful. They felt that staff knew them well and felt confident going to them with any questions or concerns.

Staff felt they were respected and valued in their teams and felt confident they could approach managers with their concerns. Managers reported they had happy teams who worked well together. They also reported good working relationships with other services. Staff and managers were knowledgeable about the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act and knew how to protect patients’ rights under these.

There were no concerns raised by partner organisations.

All observed interactions between staff and patients were compassionate and caring. Patients were treated with dignity and there was notable evidence of good work dealing with complex cases. Services provided patients with premises that they could feel comfortable in and where confidential conversations could be had.

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 built up good relationships with key workers allowing open and honest conversations. Information was shared with them to help support decision making on care and treatment. Support was offered around keeping healthy as well as around education and employment. Patients on all sites had access to advocacy. Carers felt their loved ones were well supported. Where requested they were also provided with information they needed.

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.

Observations of care showed staff working well to support any additional communication needs. On inspection clinic environments appeared fit for purpose. Appropriate information was displayed in waiting and clinic rooms across all sites.

Appropriate systems are in places 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 knew their key workers well and felt they were caring and interested in their wellbeing. They felt confident talking to staff and raising any concerns they had. Patients were able to contact staff when needed outside of appointments. Carers were also happy with the care provided by key workers and felt they were responsive to requests for further information or support.

Staff knew their patients well and therefore reported they were able to respond quickly to changes in their wellbeing. The high-risk board and morning meeting helped the team to respond quickly to those patients most in need.

All observations of care showed staff engaging patients in open discussions about their care and treatment and acting compassionately and responsively to deal with any concerns or distress. Morning meetings showed the MDT acting responsively and quickly to support those patients with increasing need and risk.

There were appropriate systems and guidance in place to support staff around clinical risk assessment and prioritisation.

Staff reported happy and supportive teams. They were happy with their roles and with the support of their managers and felt able to raise concerns when they needed. Stress levels could fluctuate, but staff generally felt their workload was manageable and that they were able to provide a high level of care to patients. Staff had good working relationships with colleagues and felt valued. Staff reported regular supervision and appraisal. They were also offered opportunity for additional training, upskilling and progression. Staff were aware of lone worker policies and how to follow them to keep themselves safe.

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.