Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Staff told us that the ward manager was supportive. Staff had regular team meetings and said they had regular supervision. However, there were difficulties in recording this on the computer system. They said there were issues with connectivity which affected recording of supervision, people’s electronic records and medicines records. The multidisciplinary team attended monthly clinical governance meetings and assessed how systems were working to ensure care and treatment was effective in meetings people’s needs. The provider assessed risks to people and staff and showed how these were reduced.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff said the ward manager was supportive and encouraged their development. Staff said this helped to make it a happy staff team that worked together well.

Staff meeting minutes showed these were held every 2 to 3 months with minutes kept of actions. These showed that staff discussed training, supervision, and the needs of people using the service. However, there seemed to be repeated information discussed about recording supervision with no action taken to address. Staff told us there were difficulties in uploading information to the system about supervision.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff raised concerns about the trust computer systems and how this affected their work. They said the patient’s electronic records system worked well. However, the connection in the building was not always good. This meant when using the electronic patients medicine system, they could lose connection, so the record was not updated in a timely way. They also said the system to record management supervision was difficult to use. This meant that data of management supervision figures were not always correct.

There were monthly clinical governance meetings with all members of the multidisciplinary team present. Managers had identified the risks associated with the ward on the provider’s risk register. These included staffing as an amber risk but this was across all wards at the Barberry and Cilantro ward had been identified as a reduced risk as recruitment had taken place. They identified as a yellow risk ligature risks and the provider had approved Capital monies to reduce this risk. They had also identified as a yellow risk the part time working of the junior doctor. This meant that 5 less patients a week were seen in the outpatients’ clinic. However, this risk was reduced due to the multidisciplinary team covering this. The issue of the computer system and loss of connectivity was not included in the provider's risk register.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.