DrPA Secure - Oakhill Secure Training Centre

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

We looked at 3 quality statements in this key question.

Staff demonstrated compassion and children felt well cared for, but clinical records often lacked evidence of involvement in care planning, and many children had no care plans, creating risks. Workforce morale was positive, staffing levels were generally sufficient, and recruitment processes were robust, though mental health teams faced high workloads pending service redesign. Staff were skilled in responding to needs, but systemic issues such as incomplete handovers occasionally delayed care. Children had excellent access to staff and felt able to discuss their health freely.

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

During this inspection we saw children being cared for by dedicated and caring staff who were working hard to meet children’s needs. Staff knew the children well. We saw compassionate and supportive interactions between children and care staff. Children told us they felt cared for by staff.

The judgement for Treating people as individuals is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Caring key question.

The judgement for Independence, choice and control is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Caring key question.

Where children presented with a healthcare need, staff were skilled and competent enough to deal with them. We saw staff working hard to meet children’s needs throughout our inspection. However, the provider’s systems did not always promote this, leading to some tasks not being completed. For example, one child was being supported with an issue by a member of staff who asked for the information to be included in the handover for follow up. This did not happen causing a delay in the child receiving support.

Children had excellent access to healthcare staff. Staff regularly visited children who were given opportunities to discuss their care should they wish. Children we spoke with told us they were able to speak with staff as they wished and felt able to discuss their health should they wish to.

The current provider had been awarded the contract within the last year. Staff told us they were enjoying working for the new provider, felt valued and their wellbeing was considered when making operational decisions.

Some staff were experiencing high workloads. We observed that the small mental health team was operating with limited staffing while supporting too many children with complex needs. The provider was aware of these pressures and were continuing to work to achieve the full complement of staff and continue to review the service including streamlining processes. Although the new model had not yet been fully implemented, it represented a theoretical improvement on the existing arrangements. Primary care services had also been reviewed recently, resulting in increased staffing levels.

Staff told us there were sufficient staff on each shift with some agency or overtime utilised in the event of short staffing. Our review of the provider’s rotas confirmed there were sufficient staff in the building during working hours to help ensure that they needs of children were met.

All staff had recently had a supervision with their line manager. Staff were complimentary of leaders and viewed them as supportive and approachable. Staff felt safe at work and knew how to raise concerns should this change.