The Blue Sky Centre - Nuneaton SARC

On this page

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

We assessed 2 quality statements under the effective key question. Staff fully assessed patients’ needs and delivered care and treatment in line with recognised standards. They understood the importance of seeking informed consent and always carefully explained to patients what their rights around consent were..

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

Patients attending the SARC received a comprehensive assessment of their needs including their mental and physical health, post sexual assault health and any risk factors. Recognised screening tools were used to assess the severity of alcohol and drug withdrawal symptoms so that appropriate care and treatment could be delivered to patients if needed.

Where appropriate, patients were provided with emergency medical and sexual health treatments following national guidance, and forensic samples were taken based on the patient’s account of what had happened to them. Patient records we review were detailed, contemporaneous and clearly outlined the care and treatment given by staff.

A meeting was held every day to review each case that had been seen at the SARC and to ensure patients’ needs had been fully assessed, and the procedures had been followed correctly. In addition to this, regular peer reviews were undertaken, allowing for a more in-depth review of the care and treatment delivered to patients.

The provider had systems to keep staff up to date with current evidence-based practice. Guidance from the Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine was reviewed every 6 months by senior clinical managers to ensure the SARC was compliant with it. Information was disseminated through regular staff bulletins, the provider’s staff intranet and through updated operating procedures.

The judgement for Delivering evidence-based care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

It was clear that staff worked effectively to ensure patients understood the options available to them and facilitated their choices with care. Records we reviewed demonstrated that patients’ consent for their medical examination, the collection of forensic samples, for medicines, and use of intimate images had been fully sought. Staff repeatedly checked with patients throughout their forensic examination if they were happy to continue with it. Patients’ capacity to give informed consent was actively assessed, with clear guidelines in place for staff about what to do if this was in doubt.

Patients commented in their feedback that staff had explained procedures well, allowing them to make informed decisions about what to do.