ADHD 360 Head Office

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment, and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At this assessment we have rated this key question good. The provider used recognised clinical tools alongside clinical judgement to support diagnosis, personalised treatment planning and the monitoring of outcomes.

ADHD360 included a specialist clinical assessment, with assessment outcomes shared with the person and their GP, and regular treatment reviews where medication was prescribed.

Staff followed relevant national guidance, including guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Care included assessment, diagnosis, medication initiation and adjustment where clinically appropriate, physical health monitoring and ongoing review.

The service monitored the effectiveness of care through clinical reviews, audits and outcome measures. Staff also supported people to improve their health and wellbeing through lifestyle advice, physical health monitoring and signposting to additional support.

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 reviewed 6 care records which contained structured ADHD assessments, with arrangements for ongoing review documented within people’s treatment plans. Records showed staff considered people’s mental and physical health and wider wellbeing as part of the assessment process. Assessments included information about presenting concerns, developmental and family history, medical history, current medicines, allergies, sleep, appetite, relationships, employment or education, risks and the impact of ADHD symptoms across different areas of people’s lives.

This was consistent with the provider’s assessment pathway. ADHD360 described an initial screening process followed, where indicated, by an assessment with an ADHD clinician. Staff used an internationally recognised assessment questionnaire to determine whether a person met the criteria for an ADHD diagnosis, assessments also supported the identification of co-existing conditions.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Following diagnosis, people were involved in developing a personalised treatment plan. Once an effective and well-tolerated medication dose had been established, people could also access optional support such as counselling, coaching, peer-support groups and webinars, depending on their individual needs and preferences.

Before prescribing medicines, staff obtained and reviewed relevant physical health information. This included information from GP records where available and baseline physical health observations, such as, blood pressure. Records showed these checks informed clinical decision-making about the suitability of treatment.

Staff used a range of recognised screening and diagnostic tools to assess adults’ ADHD symptoms, mental health, physical health, quality of life and associated risks. These included the Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale (ASRS), Wender Utah Rating Scale (WURS), Quantified Behaviour Technology (QBT) test and the diagnostic interview for ADHD in adults (DIVA-5). Assessments were supported by medical history information, NHS Summary Care Records or GP summaries, sleep and substance-use screening, and consideration of workplace, educational and psychosocial support needs.

People were screened for risks, for example, self-harm, suicide and psychosis, and clinicians considered protective factors and developed risk-management plans where concerns were identified. The assessment process also considered communication, sensory and accessibility needs and any reasonable adjustments required. A physical health screening tool, based on clinical research and NICE guidance, had been developed but was awaiting implementation.

People were actively involved in assessment and care planning. Staff considered information from relatives, GPs and other professionals where appropriate, and care and treatment plans were personalised to reflect individual needs and circumstances, with arrangements in place for ongoing review. Where a diagnosis was made, the provider’s pathway included development of a personalised treatment plan, including medication and dosage optimisation where appropriate and regular follow-up.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act Code of Practice.

Staff delivered care in line with relevant evidence-based guidance and its clinical policies. The clinical pathway included ADHD assessment and diagnosis, medication initiation and titration, and ongoing review. Staff followed NICE guidance during assessment and prescribing.

Staff monitored the safety and effectiveness of treatment through structured medication reviews, including relevant physical health observations and monitoring for side effects. GP summaries and relevant clinical histories were obtained before treatment, and information was shared with GPs to support continuity of care.

Staff provided a range of support tailored to people's needs, including non-pharmacological interventions such as structured “power hours”, one-to-one practical support and access to counselling services. Support addressed ADHD-related needs, including emotional regulation, sleep, executive functioning, relationships and daily living. People were signposted or referred to external psychological services where additional support was required. The provider was developing a needs-led, neuro-affirming pathway and strengthening associated governance, safeguarding, staff competence and outcome monitoring. However, this integrated pathway had not yet been fully implemented or evaluated.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff worked collaboratively and effectively across the service to ensure that people received coordinated and responsive care.

Staff and teams worked together to meet people’s needs. Multidisciplinary meetings took place monthly and were attended by staff from different clinical and operational roles. Minutes and records reviewed showed staff discussed people with complex needs, clinical risks, safeguarding concerns, prescribing decisions and responses to treatment. Actions were allocated to named staff and followed up through subsequent meetings or clinical reviews.

Staff sought advice from colleagues where concerns were identified, or decisions required additional clinical oversight. This supported shared decision-making, escalation of concerns and consistent approaches to care and treatment.

Staff worked with GPs and other professionals to coordinate care. This included obtaining and sharing relevant clinical information, coordinating prescribing and supporting shared-care arrangements. ADHD360 also worked with NHS organisations and Integrated Care Boards through RTC and commissioned NHS arrangements.

Staff involved families and liaised with occupational therapy, psychology and other services where required to meet people’s needs. The ADHD and autism services also shared training, learning opportunities, clinical expertise, governance processes and operational support. Leaders told us this supported shared learning and service improvement.

Staff supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. They supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff supported people to maintain and improve their health and wellbeing. They monitored relevant physical health indicators and discussed lifestyle factors, including nutrition, sleep, appetite, hydration and general wellbeing. Records showed advice was documented where appropriate and considered during treatment and medication reviews.

Staff encouraged people to report changes in their health, wellbeing and ADHD symptoms to their clinician. This was particularly important where medicines affected appetite, sleep or physical health. Staff provided advice about maintaining a balanced diet, eating regularly, staying hydrated and monitoring the effect of dietary changes on symptoms.

People were supported to access additional resources if additional help was needed. The provider’s online resource library included written and video information for people, families and carers about ADHD, treatment and managing the condition.

Once treatment had been reviewed and stabilised, people could access optional non-medication support, including counselling, individual coaching, family support, peer-support groups and webinars. Group sessions aimed to help people understand ADHD and develop practical strategies for managing symptoms and their impact on daily life. Staff also offered support specifically for parents and carers of children with ADHD.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Staff monitored people’s outcomes through assessment and treatment. Assessments combined clinical information with structured and objective measures to support clinical decision-making. the provider used a recognised ADHD assessment tool as part of its assessment pathway to provide objective information about attention, activity and impulsivity. Follow-up assessments could also be used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment and inform ongoing treatment decisions.

Audits, clinical records, meetings and feedback were used to monitor the quality and effectiveness of care. Regular reviews enabled clinicians to assess treatment response, identify side effects and make changes where required. People were provided with regular follow-ups during treatment and ongoing support once treatment was stable and optimised.

There was evidence that care had a positive impact on people’s daily lives. Feedback and care records identified improvements in areas including daily functioning, focus, self-management and understanding of ADHD following assessment and treatment. People described being better able to understand and manage their symptoms and the impact these had on their day-to-day lives.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

The service sought, recorded and reviewed people’s consent throughout their care and treatment. They understood and followed relevant legislation, guidance and the provider’s consent policy. Where required, staff assessed people’s capacity to make specific decisions and provided appropriate support to help them understand their options.

Records showed consent was obtained prior to assessments, treatment and prescribing. Consent was reviewed during medication titration, follow-up appointments and ongoing treatment reviews. Staff explained the purpose, expected benefits and potential side effects of treatment, and people could ask questions before deciding whether to proceed.

Staff obtained consent before sharing relevant clinical information with GPs and other professionals. Where treatment was stable, staff discussed the option of shared care with people before contacting their GP. Leaders described shared care as an arrangement through which a GP may take over longer-term prescribing, while the provider continues to support the person’s ADHD care.

People felt involved in decisions about their care and treatment and that staff explained the available options clearly. Records supported that consent was sought and respected throughout the care pathway. People’s decisions, including a decision not to proceed with a treatment option, were respected and documented.