Kemple View

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed toGood.

Good: This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

We make sure people are at the centre of their care and treatment choices and we decide, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

• Staff considered each patient’s individual therapeutic needs. Patients were allocated a psychologist on admission and each patient was assessed to identify their individual pathway.
• We spoke to 11 patients across both wards and 8 patients told us they had a treatment of choice and engaged in their care decisions. Patients told us staff took their preferences into account and most patients told us that they participated indecisions relating to their medication. Patients participated in housing decisions where appropriate.

We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity.

• When appropriate, staff ensured that patients had access to education and work opportunities. Patients had the opportunity for paid work, such as working in the on-site café and cleaningon the wards. The service had an education facility on site to help patients gain qualifications such as Maths and English. Patients also engaged in voluntary work in the community.
• Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families and carers where appropriate, this was either face to face or sometimes online or by phone.
• Staff supported patients to access their chosen place of worship within the community.

We provide appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailor to individual needs.

• Staff made notifications to external bodies as needed.
• Information governance systems included confidentiality of patient records.
• Staff ensured that patients could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights, how to complain, these were on notice boards across Hawthorn and Oakwood wards. The information provided was in a form accessible to the patient group.
• Staff made information leaflets available in languages spoken by patients.
• Staff ensured carers, families and commissioners were regularly updated about the patient’s progress.

We make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. We involve them in decisions about their care and tell them what’s changed as a result.

• There had been 30 complaintsreceived by the service in the 12 months prior to assessment. 3 of these were upheld and 9 were partially upheld. One complaint was still being investigated at the time of our inspection.
• Patients knew how to complain or raise concerns. There was information on how to do this on noticeboards throughout the wards.
• The wards had a complaint book, where patients could raise concerns in the first instance. Staff would help patients write their concerns in this book if required. Managers would then try and resolve these informally with the patient within 24 hours of the concern being raised. Any actions and results were then documented on the hospitalselectronic incident reporting system. However, this system could make it difficult for patients to complain anonymously. The service was working on a “Your complaint - what happened” template, which they described as a more user-friendly format. However, it still posed concerns for patients who wished to complain anonymously.
• When patients complained or raised concerns, they received feedback.
• Staff protected patients who raised concerns or complaints from discrimination and harassment.
• Staff knew how to manage complaints appropriately.
• Staff received feedback on the outcome of investigation of complaints and acted on the findings

We make sure that everyone can access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

• Hawthorn and Oakwood wards were partially ensuite, patients needed to use the stairs to gain access to upstairs bedrooms. There was no lift access for patients. The service advised should a patient have disability they would be provided with a room downstairs. There was no adaptable room for people who have a disability. There were no seclusion rooms on Oakwood or Hawthorn wards.
• Staff made reasonable adjustments for patients, for example, people with mobility issues were provided with walking aids, shower chairs and bedrooms on the ground floor.
• There was adequate medical cover day and night, a doctor could attend the ward quickly in an emergency and the hospital was within a reasonable travelling distance to the local acute hospital.
• Staff ensured patients had access to post-discharge care for example, S117 aftercare, community mental health services and crisis services.
• Staff planned for patients’ discharge, including liaison with care managers/co-ordinators. Staff met every 8 weeks with commissioners and reviewed discharges at these meetings. Discharge was never delayed other than for clinical reasons. Staff identified that delays were largely due to finding suitable accommodation that met the needs of the patients.

We actively seek out and listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. We tailor the care, support and treatment in response to this.

• Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views.
• The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of their policies and procedures to ensure they did not place vulnerable people or people with protected characteristics at a disadvantage.
• Staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion, and human rights.

We support people to plan for important life changes, so they can have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

• Staff support patients to make decisions about their care and treatment and their future and included DNACPRs where appropriate.
• Staff created personalised care plans to account for the patient’s needs, wishes and feelings.
• Care for people who were nearing the end of their life was managed and communicated in a sensitive and dignified way.
• Staff ensured all relevant healthcare professionals and other relevant bodies are involved in planning the care and treatment of people with complex needs.