Archived: Harvey House

Updated 4 November 2016

Harvey House is an 18 bed residential detoxification service providing accommodation and treatment for both male and female clients over the age of 18. Harvey House is situated on the outskirts of Lancaster in Lancashire. A large percentage of placements were funded by statutory organisations although clients were able to self-refer. There is a counselling service that attends on a weekly basis and arrangements outside of this time can be arranged.

Harvey House is registered to provide;

• For persons who require treatment for substance misuse.

• Diagnostic and screening procedures.

• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

There were seven clients receiving treatment on the day of our inspection.

There is a registered manager in place who has recently been appointed. The service was last inspected by CQC in June 2013 and was found to be compliant with the essential standards of quality and safety we looked at on the inspection.

Updated 4 November 2016

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found the following issues that the provider needs to improve:

• Managers did not supervise and appraise staff’s work performance consistently.

• The organisation did not have a ligature and environmental audit in place. This is to ensure that staff take action to reduce any ligature risks and ensure the premises are safe. Fridge temperatures were out of range for a consecutive period and these had not been brought to the attention of the management to address this issue.

• There were gaps in the information held on staff files. Managers were not fully checking whether potential staff were suitable before they started working with clients at Harvey House.

• Not all staff were up-to-date with mandatory training and therefore did not receive ongoing training and support to carry out their roles safely and effectively.

• The auditing programme was not fully implemented. Managers were not fully assessing, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service provided.

• The patient group directive for the emergency administration of chlordiazepoxide was not up-to-date, signed and authorised.

• The company director was not visible within the organisation and staff were not kept fully up to date about the organisation’s future direction.

• There was no reference to the Duty of candour in any of the policies and procedures as required under regulation 20 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

• The registered person had not submitted a notification to CQC to inform the Commission that an event (flooding) took place that prevented them from carrying out the regulated activities safely and where service users had to be moved to other services as required under Regulation 18 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009.

However, we also found the following areas of good practice:

• The service had enough staff to care for the number of clients and their level of need. Staff knew and put into practice the service’s values, and they knew and had contact with managers at all levels, including the most senior managers except at director level.

• Staff carried out assessments before clients were admitted to ensure that the service could meet the individuals’ needs. Risk assessments were comprehensive and staff reviewed them regularly.

• Clients were involved in decisions about their treatment and care.

• The environment was clean, well maintained, welcoming and comfortable.

• Staff treated clients with respect and kindness and supported them throughout their stay.

• Staff we spoke with were highly motivated in their work and told us they felt supported by the manager and business manager. Staff told us they felt comfortable raising any concerns or issues.