Archived: Solutions 4 Health- Newcastle

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Requires Improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respect their privacy and dignity.

During inspection we spoke to 14 staff who were responsible for the direct delivery of care. Staff were confident in their ability to deliver care and treatment to the service group. Staff were able to describe the referral processes, treatment options and onwards pathways for people using the service. Staff were able to identify when safeguarding would be involved and how to assess people's understanding of care and treatment options provided.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. However, we did note on 2 occasions where care was not provided in line with clinical guidance, where this had happened the clinicians involved had not provided a documented rationale that outlined the reasons for their care and treatment decisions

The service provided home or community location appointments for people with a learning disability. Staff were able to tell us how the demographics and population effected the level of service delivery required.

2 out of 3 respondents to the provider’s survey stated they were treated with respect, dignity and kindness while they were using this service.

Information provided to service users was in an accessible form for the service user group the service served.

The service did not consistently document that they had gained consent for treatment from service users. Chaperones were also not consistently offered to service users.

The service was not always able to respond to people’s immediate needs. The service was not able to provide an adequate number of appointments for the population it served.

Staff at the service did not feel respected, supported and valued by the leadership team. Staff spoke highly of the head of operations for the service and felt supported and valued by them.

Staff had a passion for their jobs and the role they performed in the community, however staff told us they did not feel proud about working for the provider.

Staff informed us that the occupational health support was not helpful, specifically in relation to needlestick injuries.