You are here

Scovell Street, Salford Good


Inspection carried out on 24 June 2019

During a routine inspection

We rated Scovell Street, Salford as good because:

  • The service provided safe care. The premises where clients were seen were safe and clean. The service had enough staff. Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
  • Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the clients and in line with national guidance about best practice.
  • Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal. Staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team and with relevant services outside the organisation.
  • Staff treated clients with compassion, kindness and understood the individual needs of clients. They actively involved clients in decisions and care planning.
  • The service had clear referral criteria and pathways. Staff planned and managed discharge well and had alternative pathways for people whose needs it could not meet.
  • The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that its procedures ran smoothly.


  • The décor of the building was old and tired
  • Consideration of mental capacity was not always recorded as part of consent to treatment.

Inspection carried out on 24 October 2017

During a routine inspection

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • The building was clean and safely maintained. Appropriate health and safety checks had been completed and were up to date. There was a programme of maintenance checks for equipment and facilities. This meant that the environment was safe and comfortable for clients.

  • Clients risk was managed. All clients had a comprehensive risk assessment in place. Staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of their role and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding.

  • There were sufficient numbers of staff to deliver care. Staff were appropriately skilled and supported. There was a programme of mandatory training and regular supervision. Staff accessed National Vocational Qualifications.

  • Care was delivered in line with best practice. Recovery was embedded in the delivery and culture of the service. There were strong links with the local recovery community including mutual aid groups. Peer mentors were a visible presence. Care plans were recovery focused. Clients were supported to identify their objectives and the support they needed. Clients were supported to engage with other services.

  • Clients received a comprehensive assessment on admission. Care records reflected the findings of the assessment. Clients were involved in the assessment process and completed a self-assessment as part of this process.

  • Client feedback on the service was positive. They spoke highly of staff, the treatment they had received and were optimistic about their future.

  • Staff morale was good. Staff felt supported by managers and colleagues. There were low absence and sickness rates. Senior managers within the provider organisation were known to staff and visited the service. Staff spoke highly of the local team management. They were considered approachable and open.

  • There was a governance structure in place to monitor and support the delivery of care. The service monitored performance through the national drug treatment monitoring system. The service manager contributed to performance reviews for the local treatment network. Processes were in place to report and review adverse incidents and to investigate complaints.