HMP Onley

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

We assessed 1 quality statement for this key question. The provider had not made sufficient progress with the identified regulatory breaches. A new management team were in place and had begun embedding change, however, this had yet to translate into meaningful outcomes for patients.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Shared direction and culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

Managers had improved some governance structures for better oversight, although there were insufficient staff deployed and outcomes for patients had not improved.

At the last inspection we found that the provider did not have robust processes in place to oversee the running of the service. During this inspection, we found that whilst the newly formed management team had introduced some updated processes, the quality of the service provided to patients had shown minimal improvement. For example, the mental health lead had oversight and input to ensure patients with mental health needs had their medicines, physical health checks and CPAs reviewed. Management had also established new daily meetings and regular staff team meetings. However, there were insufficient staff and there had been little improvement in the availability of non-medical interventions for patients. Management had made a positive drive to recruit staff and appointments had been made, but there were insufficient staff in post at the time of inspection. Deployment of staff also lacked oversight with minimal therapeutic interventions available to patients, staff time was disproportionaltely spent on assessing patients' needs, with little support available once their needs had been assessed.

Audits were focussed on quantative information and failed to identify the poor quality of patient records, in particular, risk assessments, care plans and discharge records; the lack of qualatative review limited scope to make improvements.

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.