HMP Thameside

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 from this key question. We found positive changes to the leadership team. Governance structures were embedded and having a positive impact on service delivery.

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.

During our last inspection we found governance arrangements were not well developed or embedded.During this inspection we found improvements had been made.

The provider had made a number of recent leadership changes. Staff we spoke with praised these and told us of a number of positive improvements directly resulting from the new leadership. Our observations confirmed this. In addition to the local leadership changes, PPG kept in place a turnaround team comprised of experts in key areas of delivery to drive improvements. This team were having a demonstrable positive impact on service delivery. However, the provider should take steps to ensure the inevitable withdrawal of the team is well planned to prevent de-stabilising the service.

Following our last inspection, the provider had implemented a thorough action plan. This plan outlined each of the concerns previously found, the steps needed to address the concern, the person or people responsible for addressing the concern and timeframes for completion. We found this action plan to be effective and having a positive impact on all aspects of the service as outlined in this report.

At our previous inspection we identified several shortfalls with the recording and quality of several key governance meetings. During this inspection we reviewed the most recent minutes from the senior management team meeting, the patient safety incident review group (PSIRG), and the local quality assurance and improvement meeting (LQAM). We noted considerable improvement in all. For example, we found there was good discussion and analyses of incidents at the PSIRG meeting with particularly extensive information submitted by the substance misuse team. We noted a detailed tracker had been created following the senior management team meeting, giving an update on all the actions identified at the meeting and their status. In addition, a full staff meeting was now in place which was well attended.

The provider had made improvements to the allocation of care duties (tasks) on the electronic care record. Previously, tasks lacked oversight, and too many were not actioned for prolonged periods of time. The provider now ensured tasks were better managed with clear structures in place ensuring people’s care was well managed. Tasks were now allocated to staff groups instead of an individual and a member of staff was tasked with reviewing tasks on a daily basis.

The provider had a suite of audits in place which were now used to develop and improve the service. We saw examples of thorough audits taking place and the findings shared with relevant staff. In addition, we saw examples where improvements had been made as a direct result of the audits.

Oversight of incidents was good. We saw examples of appropriate incident reporting. In addition, the provider had strengthened their processes for analysis and learning from incidents ensuring staff received this information in a timely way. Systems were robust and correctly able to identify areas for concern and trends in reporting to implement positive changing.

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.