You are here


Inspection carried out on 23 & 24 October 2018

During a routine inspection

we rated Linwood House as good because:

  • All client records contained a risk assessment which staff reviewed daily.
  • There were effective procedures in place for the administration of medication.
  • Clients were admitted through a robust admission assessment process.
  • Staff demonstrated a thorough knowledge of clients’ individual needs.
  • The service could respond promptly to requests to access support and had a flexible approach treatment options available.
  • The service had effective governance processes in place incorporating client feedback in to key performance indicator reports.


  • Actions identified in the ligature policy had not been completed.
  • A sharps bin in the clinic room had not been returned in the required timeframe.
  • Best interest decisions to admit clients who temporarily lacked capacity or the rational and risk mitigation to admit clients who did not give consent for the service to contact their GP were not recorded.

Inspection carried out on 06 September to 07 September 2017

During a routine inspection

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found the following issues that need to improve:

  • Infection control procedures were not adequate and had not been appropriately risk assessed.

  • Facilities in the clinic room on the detoxification unit did not promote effective infection control.

  • Risk assessments were not always reviewed following changes in clients circumstances

  • The service relied on clients to provide relevant risk and medical history where they had not given consent for staff to contact their GP

  • Staff practice in the recording of medication administration was not consistent.

  • Care plans were generic in nature and did not reflect the clients’ individual preference or support needs

  • Information on how to complain was not displayed on notice boards or readily available to clients in the service welcome pack.

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

  • Staffing levels in the service could be increased based on the level of occupancy and the needs of the clients.

  • We observed genuine, caring interactions between staff and clients.

  • The staff we spoke with demonstrated a thorough knowledge of the clients and their individual recovery plans.

  • The service was able to respond promptly to requests for detoxification or rehabilitation, offering clients an admission date and time to suit their needs.