The Haynes Clinic Limited Also known as Chicksands

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 rated Caring as Requires improvement because of a lack of individualised care planning and risk assessment. Also concerns about staff attitude and behaviours had been raised through complaints made to the service.

However, people we spoke with were positive about staff and their experience. They were supported to keep in contact with family and access the local community.

Staff felt well supported and were proud and positive to work for the service.

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.

People we spoke with told us they felt staff were polite and respectful and treated them with care and compassion.

They told us they felt safe and cared for and were positive about their experience. The provider shared examples of feedback from people who had previously used the service through social media and compliments describing how their time at Haynes Clinic had positively changed their lives.

We reviewed a feedback report for 2024 and found people were positive about the support of counsellors and staff.

Most staff spoke with compassion when talking about people and were passionate about their service. However, 1 person told us they had experienced a member of staff behaving disrespectfully towards them in front of others. One staff we spoke with used belittling and demeaning language about people in the service.

During the on-site inspection, we reviewed 4 complaints that had been received between April 2024 and January 2025. A theme of these complaints was attitude of staff.

The provider gave examples of where they had supported people to meet their individual preference and needs. For example, supporting a person to access a podiatrist for a pedicure and general foot care; supporting a person who arrived without adequate clothing to shop for new clothes and a person wishing to live closer to the clinic to find alternative accommodation. Another person using walking aids, asked for a second handrail going up the stairs. Staff told us the service had put this in place.

However, 1 person with a hearing impairment had not been supported to take part in group therapy.

Staff told us they encouraged communication with family members and people we spoke with confirmed this.

All people we spoke with were pleased with the care and treatment they had been receiving. The provider was holding weekly community meetings, where people had the opportunity to discuss their care and give feedback on the service.

The provider had an activities timetable in place, with a range of therapeutic groups available.

People were supported to access the local community to support them in their recovery. People could access the local gym, which was facilitated by staff.

People were given the choice of what food they would like to cook and add to the shopping list.

People did not have access to call alarms, this meant staff relied on the person to call out loudly if they needed help. This puts people at risk of harm if they have a medical emergency that requires staff assistance. Following the assessment the service installed alarm bells.

Staff were not fully aware of risks as individual risk assessments and ligature risk assessments were not robust and lacked mitigation and safety plans.

Staff described how they would take the person to the local hospital in an emergency. The service did not stock emergency medicines for use in the case of adverse reaction to prescribed medicines.

Staff we spoke with felt valued and were positive and proud about working for the provider. Staff were supportive of each other.