Thurrock Drug and Alcohol Treatment and Recovery Service

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

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.

This is the first assessment for Thurrock Drug and Alcohol Treatment and Recovery Service. This key question has been rated as good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all people. They developed individual care plans which were reviewed regularly through multidisciplinary discussion and updated as needed. Staff provided a range of treatment and care for people based on national guidance and best practice. The team included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of people. Staff from different disciplines and organisations worked together as a team to benefit people.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Effective.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

We reviewed 4 care and treatment records. Staff had completed comprehensive assessments of people’s physical and mental health. Where indicated, staff used recognised tools such as the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) and the Severity Alcohol Dependence Questionnaire (SADQ) and completed alcohol and drug screening.

Staff developed care plans that met the needs identified during the assessment and updated these regularly. Care plans were personalised, holistic, recovery-oriented and linked to individual goals and risks.

People and carers we spoke with said they were involved in reviewing their care and treatment. All felt that staff understood and supported their individual needs. Staff we spoke with demonstrated understanding of individuals’ needs and a person-centred approach to assessing these.

Regular liaison with primary care ensured that GPs and pharmacists were kept informed of treatment initiation and changes, supporting a holistic understanding of people’s needs.

Staff offered people access to a paper or electronic copy of their care plan. Most people and carers told us they had been offered a copy.

Staff offered all people a routine screening for blood borne viruses (BBV).

The service had a dual diagnosis worker based on-site once a week to assess and support people with co-occurring mental health and substance misuse needs. Their role included carrying out mental health assessments, identifying risks, and working alongside drug and alcohol and mental health services to develop coordinated care plans.

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 1983 and the Mental Health Act Code of Practice and discharged these well.

The service delivered evidence-based interventions to meet individual substance misuse needs. Staff carried out assessments to identify risks and needs, providing psychosocial interventions through a variety of groups sessions and made referrals to secondary mental health services, if needed. Pharmacological treatments, including opioid substitution therapy, community detoxification, and medication-assisted treatment for alcohol dependence, were delivered with careful monitoring. Harm reduction approaches, including needle and syringe programs, naloxone distribution, and safer-use education, helped reduce immediate risks. Recovery and aftercare interventions were available in an established programme and included peer support and structured relapse prevention that promoted engagement, continuity of care, and improved long-term outcomes.

The service had access to specialists required to meet the needs of people. The service had satellite hubs where staff were based at to see people as needed, volunteers, peer support workers and mentors, hospital liaison staff, criminal justice team staff, a dual diagnosis worker, nurses, a doctor attending once a week, and non-medical prescribers. The service were recruiting complex needs outreach worker roles and were planning to recruit hospital liaison staff in the future.

Staff had the right skills, knowledge and experience to meet the needs of people. In addition, this included some staff with lived experience. New staff received comprehensive induction, and all staff received regular supervision and appraisal of their work performance.

Staff ensured that people had good access to physical healthcare, including referral to specialists when needed. A dedicated well-being nurse managed specific physical health needs, completing BBV testing, blood pressure monitoring, thiamine administration, FibroScans, ECGs, and administering Buvidal (prolonged-release buprenorphine depot injections) on site. These arrangements supported timely assessment, treatment, and monitoring of people’s physical health within the service.

Staff participated in clinical audit, benchmarking and quality improvement initiatives. Staff audited recovery plans.

Managers provided new staff with appropriate induction.

Managers provided staff with supervision (meetings to discuss case management, to reflect on and learn from practice, and for personal support and professional development) and appraisal of their work performance.

Managers ensured that staff had access to regular team meetings.

Managers identified the learning needs of staff and provided them with opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge.

Managers ensured that staff received the necessary specialist training for their roles. Managers had recently provided staff with training in neurodiversity.

Managers dealt with poor staff performance promptly and effectively.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff held regular multidisciplinary (MDT) meetings, to review people, manage risks, share learning, and coordinate with external agencies.

Daily handover and morning “flash” meetings ensured clear communication within teams. Staff discussed risks, incidents, daily plans, and updates, while maintaining a supportive and cooperative environment.

Meetings were held both weekly and monthly covering governance, planning, reflective practice, and supervision across the service.

Teams maintained effective partnerships with external organisations, including pharmacies, hospitals, safeguarding teams, mental health services, housing providers, homelessness services, prisons, probation services, sexual health service, child centres and GPs, ensuring consistent information sharing and coordinated care.

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

Staff supported people to lead healthier lives, including engaging them in smoking cessation initiatives and providing support with substance misuse. The service also monitored people’s physical health in relation to substance misuse. For example, staff offered vaccinations for hepatitis B and completed fibroscans to monitor liver function.

The service had implemented the ‘Swap to Stop’ initiative, providing free vape kits to support people to stop smoking.

The service had established strong links with local food banks and supplied food parcels to people in need across both sites. Nutritional support was provided through breakfast drop-in sessions.

Staff provided male and female personal care packs to ensure people had access to essential items to maintain their personal hygiene.

Physical health and wellbeing were supported through a range of structured activities and interventions. These included health and wellbeing workshops that promoted practical skills, routine, and mindfulness to improve overall wellbeing.

The service also offered regular recovery-focused activities such as monthly walks and social events, encouraging physical activity, peer support, and community engagement.

In addition, staff offered complementary therapies, such as acupuncture, to support both physical and emotional wellbeing.

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 used recognised rating scales to assess outcomes. People were supported through monthly Treatment Outcome Profile (TOPs) reviews, guided by a clear theory of change model. Staff used treatment outcomes profile (TOP) to assess peoples’ progress and outcomes before, during and at the end of treatment. TOP is the national outcome monitoring tool for substance misuse services. Leaders monitored and reported outcome data to commissioners.

The service provided an online programme called ‘Recovery Online’, a 12 week online structured day rehabilitation programme available for people to access anywhere in the UK. The programme supported self-employed or working professionals, parents and caregivers, housebound or disabled individuals and individuals seeking discreet care.

The programme enabled people to access structured support remotely, helping to reduce barriers such as travel and increase engagement. It also promoted peer connection, routine, and continuity of care alongside in-person services.

Over the previous 12 months, across all treatment pathways within the service, 146 people successfully completed treatment, with 426 individuals engaged in treatment at the time of inspection.

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

Staff informed people of their rights regarding consent and consistently respected these when delivering person-centred care.

Staff received mandatory training in Mental Capacity, with a compliance rate of 93.3%, and were aware of how to access support from managers when needed. A clear policy was in place and accessible to staff.

Records demonstrated that consent to care, treatment, and information sharing was appropriately documented, with clear evidence of recorded consent in all records reviewed. However, assessments of mental capacity appeared to be primarily completed by clinicians, rather than being consistently recognised and applied by all staff.