Turning Point - Suffolk SU Drug and Alcohol Service

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 means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. The service treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff were discreet, respectful, and responsive when caring for people. Throughout the inspection, we saw positive interactions between staff and people who used the service. We observed staff responding to people sensitively and in a respectful manner. When people arrived at the service, we observed staff greeted them promptly and in a friendly manner. We observed 2 service user appointments and observed staff speaking to people in a respectful way and with compassion. Staff also explained important information in a way people could understand.

Staff supported people to understand and manage their own care, treatment or condition. Most of the people we spoke to told us that they were involved in creating their care plans with staff and that they were reviewed regularly. Most people said they were able to speak to a prescriber when they needed to.

Most people we spoke to told us that staff treated them well and behaved kindly. One person told us that staff were "immensely compassionate, honest, professional". Another person told us there was "never any judgement" from staff.

Staff understood and respected the individual needs of each person. People told us that staff understood their needs and supported them. People felt particularly supported by their keyworkers, and some people described that their keyworkers had "saved" them.

Staff followed policy to keep people's information confidential. Information was held on electronic systems which were protected. Staff entered a personal username and password to access this information. The interview rooms at the service were soundproof to offer people privacy in their discussions with staff. However, some patients reported that staff sometimes discussed other service users in front of them.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure their care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences, taking account of their strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service made adjustments for disabled people. The service was fully accessible for disabled people at Bury St Edmunds. There were disabled toilet facilities at Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich. Staff made adjustments for disabled people at Ipswich and Lowestoft locations by facilitating their visits in a ground floor room. Leaders told us they hoped to be granted funding to develop a disabled toilet facility at Lowestoft in the future. Additionally, staff were flexible and would see people at satellite sites and other locations such as GP surgeries and their homes to meet their needs.

Staff ensured people could obtain information on treatments, local services and how to complain. For example, one person we spoke to told us they had been signposted to a partner charity for employment opportunities and support. People who told us they had raised a complaint told us that it was dealt with promptly and appropriately.

Staff made information leaflets available in languages spoken by people who used the service. Leaders ensured that staff and patients had access to interpreters. Staff told us that they had previously used a British Sign Language (BSL) interpreter.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. The service responded to these and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff were aware of and dealt with any specific risk issues and care planned for these accordingly. We observed leaders and staff working together to identify and respond to changing risks to or posed by people who used the service.

We observed staff supporting someone who found the assessment process overwhelming. Staff adjusted the assessment to meet that person’s needs by breaking it down into multiple sessions to best support that person and meet their needs. This approach enabled the individual to benefit from the service.

People could give feedback on their treatment at the service, and staff supported them to do this. Most people told us they knew how to raise a concern, and people told us they felt confident to raise a concern and that they believed it would be dealt with appropriately.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.