The Well Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff involved patients in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed patients’ care and worked with other services to achieve this.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

Leaders fostered a strong culture of improvement, where understanding outcomes and exploring best practice was deeply embedded. The service carefully considered the best ways to encourage feedback from young patients and sought to achieve high levels of engagement.

Learning was actively shared and used to make meaningful changes. Assessments were regularly reviewed, considering people’s communication, personal, and health needs. Patients received care and treatment that supported healthier lives. For example, the service had a high level of collaboration with other healthcare providers and organisations and helped young patients to engage with these services.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure patients’ care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Feedback from patients using the service was positive. Patients felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. Reception staff were aware of the needs of patients. Reception staff used digital flags within the care records system to highlight any specific individual needs. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Clinical staff used templates when conducting care reviews to support the review of people’s wider health and wellbeing. New patients received a biopsychosocial assessment and regular follow-ups to ensure their needs were met as they developed.

The service planned and delivered patients’ care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was provided in line with current guidance.

The service always worked well across teams and services to support patients. They shared thorough assessments of patients’ needs when they moved between different services, so patients only needed to tell their story once.

We saw examples of how the service provided support beyond its commissioned activities, which had been implemented since the previous inspection. For example, arrangements were made for Health and Wellbeing Practitioners to be based within Diabetes and Complications of Excess Weight (CEW) clinics across South London hospitals, providing support to young people with chronic diseases and supporting their engagement with hospital teams. The service also supported patients who were entering the Lambeth Youth Justice Service by advocating for their needs and fostering engagement.

The staff within the service worked closely and seamlessly with CAMHS. For example, if a patient’s needs increased or decreased, they could be transferred between the two providers to ensure their care needs were best met.

The service always supported patients to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The service worked with a local hospital to help patients improve their health in relation to smoking, alcohol, exercise and diet.

In 2024, the service introduced patient group activities including games and discussions to promote emotional wellbeing. This included a group for boys and non-binary young patients centred around self-esteem, anxiety, bullying, anger and friendships, and a group for girls and non-binary young patients centred around self-esteem, confidence, friendships and boundaries. The service also held creative therapy workshops and a sports day.

The service measured the impact of these activities by regularly obtaining feedback from young patients. For example, young patients reported that they enjoyed the group activities because they were fun, staff were welcoming and knowledgeable, and all participants said they would recommend the activities to a friend.

The service routinely monitored patients’ care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

We found that patients who used the service experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

The service used WHO-5 Wellbeing Index to measure outcomes for patients. The results showed that 82% or patients experienced an increase in their WHO-5 score following intervention from the service, and the average percentage increase across

the Well Centre was 62%. A 10% difference indicates a significant change.

The service had collaborated with young patients when deciding which method they would use to measure outcomes. This was so they could identify a method that would ensure a high level of engagement. Members of the youth participation group felt the WHO-5 Wellbeing Index was the most suitable method because it had a short and accessible questionnaire.

The service told patients about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.