You are here

We are With You Redcar and Cleveland Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 22 & 23 January 2019

During a routine inspection

We rated Addaction Redcar and Cleveland Service as requires improvement because:

  • There were areas of improvement required to manage safety in the service. Not all clients had an individual risk assessment. Risk assessments were not consistently fully completed to evidence that all risks had been considered. Where risk assessments had been completed it was not clear how staff planned to manage identified risks effectively.
  • The service was not consistently well led. There was no system for local risks to be identified, recorded, monitored and managed in a comprehensive way which could be viewed by staff, management and senior management. Risks could only be escalated by the service manager. The provider did not ensure that systems and processes, such as clinical audit, were adequate to ensure electronic care records, including care plans, risk management plans and recovery plans, were complete, accurate, and contemporaneous. Issues had been identified by the provider and an improvement plan was in place but this had failed to improve records by the time of our inspection.

However:

  • The service was providing effective care. The service had a multidisciplinary team of competent, knowledgeable staff who worked well together and supported each other to provide effective care and treatment to clients. Staff were well supported by management with regular supervision and support with training provided where learning and development needs and goals were identified.
  • Staff were caring. Feedback from clients was consistently positive about staff attitudes and behaviours. Clients said staff understood and managed their care and treatment in a personalised way and all clients knew their recovery coordinator who acted as a point of contact for the service. The service had access to a range of interventions to support clients and those close to them. This included clients’ social networks, employment and education opportunities.
  • The service was providing care in a way that was responsive to people’s needs. All locations had accessible client areas including clinic rooms and interview rooms. There were no waiting lists, and staff were able to see clients at short notice if required. Staff were flexible with appointment times and locations where clients could be seen and appointments were rarely cancelled. Clients were clear about the complaints process and were confident enough to raise issues if required.