We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Haynes Clinic Limited - Everton Park on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The Haynes Clinic Limited - Everton Park, you can give feedback on this service.
We rated The Haynes Clinic as good because:
• The service had enough staff. Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the clients and in line with national guidance about best practice.
• The team had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of clients under their care. Managers ensured that staff received training, supervision and appraisal. Staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team.
• Staff treated clients with compassion and kindness and understood the individual needs of clients. They actively involved clients in decisions and care planning.
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that its procedures ran smoothly.
However:
• Blood pressure and temperature monitoring for one client on a detox regime was not present within their file. This was not in line with The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance which states close monitoring and review is needed.
• The provider’s accommodation was mixed sex. Bathrooms were not designated for males or females and sleeping areas were not separated for males and females.
• The client’s kitchen area at the clinic where clients could make hot drinks was unclean.
When we carried out this inspection on 11 November 2013, we found the provider had introduced further systems to support staff, and ensured staff received an annual appraisal and appropriate professional development.
The provider had implemented new documentation to record the audits of quality and safety for this service, and we found actions had been taken to make improvements following comments and suggestions from people who used the service.
We saw that systems were in place to obtain the consent from those receiving treatment, and that treatment was planned and delivered to meet people's needs.
We saw the provider had made improvements to the areas we previously identified concerns with for maintaining safe premises, and that the accommodation was well maintained and clean.
We looked at the training and support processes for staff and found that staff did not receive regular supervision or appraisals.
We identified that the provider did not have effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided to people living at The Haynes Clinic - Everton Park.
We found the provider had made improvements to this service since our inspection in October 2012. We received positive feedback from both the people we spoke with. One person told us, 'It's nice to be around people who understand what I've been going through and I feel safe to talk about things I wouldn't normally [talk about].'
People said that they felt their rights were respected by the staff. One person told us, 'I feel my rights are extremely well respected. I had legal issues to deal with that was a big worry, I didn't feel able to cope with them and the staff have been really helpful.'
People told us that they were able to make choices within the structure of the programme. For instance, people said there was choice about how they spent their spare time and the food that was prepared for meals.
We found that people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their care and treatment plans. Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs. Both people told us that they felt safe at the service and had good relationships with the staff and the other people receiving a service.
The provider had improved their procedures relating to the recruitment and selection of staff. They had taken action to ensure that staff were suitable to work with people using this service.
However, people also commented that their dignity, diversity and physical needs were not always met or respected. They did not always have sufficient choices and did not receive sufficient information about the service.
Each person had a care plan in place. However, these were not personalised and did not give staff sufficient guidance on the specific care each person needed. For some people, risks had been identified but there was no guidance in place for staff on how to manage the risks.
People told us they received the medicines they had been prescribed. We found that medicines were not being managed correctly. Fire safety checks were not satisfactory so put people at risk. The provider's recruitment process was not robust enough to ensure staff employed were suitable to work with people using the service.
People told us they did not know who to speak with if they wanted to comment or complain. They said there was no complaint information displayed in the service.