Turning Point Leicester City Substance Misuse

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good.

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

The design, layout, and furnishings of the service supported clients’ treatment, privacy and dignity. Staff supported clients with activities outside the service, such as work, education and family relationships. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the result.

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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We reviewed 12 client care records and found all records to be up to date. Most records were personalised; 4 were lacking person centred language and client views. The service carried out audits of care records which found that recovery plans were generic and lacked person centred and holistic language. However, records still held relevant information to clients. The provider was proactive in designing a new care plan template that was more person centred; we observed one of these on site, which appeared to reflect a more holistic approach such as a goal to maintain family contact.

The service introduced “Person Centred Approach” training to their mandatory training to respond to this. At the time of inspection, this was at 65% compliance due to being in its very early stages.

We saw examples of how client needs were considered and how care was adapted to meet those needs. For example, meeting in various approved locations around the city or in client’s homes.

One client told us that staff monitored their physical health closely due to their history of heart problems.

Many clients reported receiving support from staff with needs beyond substance use, including housing, dental care, and financial matters such as council tax.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service employment team supported clients to secure employment by providing support with applications and job seeking.

The service developed strong partnerships with other services and third-sector organisations to help meet clients’ needs. This included clinical professionals such as doctors, nurses and midwives, several different charities, religious communities, employability professionals and the police.

Staff communicated with client GP’s with consent.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

We saw evidence that the service submitted notifications to external bodies as required, including statutory CQC notifications, showing compliance with regulatory requirements.

The service had leaflets available in accessible forms for clients. For example, there was an easy ready version of the welcome leaflet and leaflets available in alternative languages for non-English speakers. Information about treatment, services, advocacy and how to complain or provide feedback was available and clearly displayed throughout the service.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Staff knew how to handle complaints appropriately and there were clear policies and procedures in place for staff to follow. The service received a total of 10 complaints between November 2024 and November 2025. Six of these were formal complaints, and 4 were informal complaints managed without the need for investigation. There were outcomes and actions relating to these, including contact with complainants/family members involved.

Within the same period, 58 compliments were received. Compliments were mostly aimed at individual recovery workers/client experience. One compliment highlighted the support of a recovery worker for a client in court.

There were complaint forms available in reception for clients to make complaints if they wished to, as well as a suggestions box.

Clients we spoke to told us that they felt able to raise concerns if they had any and we saw information clearly displayed around the service.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff ensured the needs of clients with mobility issues were met. There was a working lift in the building. The provider ensured there was a clinic and private side rooms on the bottom floor, so if the lift was broken, a person with mobility issues could access the same resources as anybody else. The front door was accessible with no steps.

Staff made reasonable adjustments for clients. The service offered drop-in assessments, so anyone could be seen for assessment at any time.

The service employed a peer mentor who was blind and ensured they were able to use the service and accommodate their guide dog. The provider told us that clients could give a preferred contact method during their first contact appointment, based on any needs they may have. For example, a person with sight impairment preferring telephone contact.

The service recognised the importance of maintaining good working relationships with external stakeholders to ensure clients had access to holistic care.

Clients had the opportunity to engage with a charity called Dear Albert when their case was closed for some continuity to help maintain abstinence.

The service also employed a female doctor in July 2025 to establish better access to treatment for women to address inequalities.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service encouraged feedback from clients to improve the service.

Staff ensured clients could access information about treatment, local services, physical health and complaints with leaflets and other materials in the reception area.

All clients we spoke to told us that they felt able to give feedback and make complaints, but that they had not felt the need to.

The service had recently introduced the national Oliver McGowan Autism and Learning Disability training into their mandatory training package. The service provided training in equality and diversity with 95% compliance.

The provider told us they can provide Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEP) for clients with limited mobility. The provider can access language line for those who do not speak English, and hearing line or British Sign Language interpreters for clients who have hearing impairments.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The service supported clients to secure employment, including a peer mentor support role. The service worked in partnership with charities that tackled issues such as domestic violence and provided continuity post-discharge from the service.

The service had a positive re-engagement policy that advised staff on how to manage clients who are not consistent with treatment. This ensured clients had multiple opportunities for support.

We reviewed 12 care records which all had plans for unexpected exit from treatment.