The Care Quality Commission
  • Mental Health
  • NHS mental health service

CPFT at Cavell Centre

The Cavell Centre, Edith Cavell Healthcare Campus, Bretton Gate, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, PE3 9GZ (01223) 726789

Provided and run by:
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile
Important: This service was previously managed by a different provider - see old profile

All Inspections

Other CQC inspections of services

Community & mental health inspection reports for CPFT at Cavell Centre can be found at Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust. Each report covers findings for one service across multiple locations
Read inspection report

12 December 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

During this inspection of the Cavell Centre, we visited the Hollies and Maple 1 wards. We found that improvements had been made in the way in which people's dignity was maintained. One person said, 'The staff are perfect, they're so kind and helpful'. We saw that staff treated people with respect and spoke with people in a kind and gentle way. We noted that staff worked well as a team to support people in the way they wanted to be supported. A senior member of staff on Maple 1 said, 'I'm extremely proud of the team, they've come a long way.' A member of staff told us, 'What we've got now is far superior: the service we provide is 100% better.'

Staff who worked on the Hollies and Maple 1 wards had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people and were fully aware of their responsibilities and how to report should they suspect abuse had occurred. People told us they felt safe.

There were sufficient staff on both wards to meet the needs of the people on each ward. Staff on the Hollies said there had been a period in the summer when they had been low on permanent staff, but the hospital's own bank of staff had covered the shifts so that there had always been enough staff to meet people's needs.

The trust reported to us that they had put systems in place to ensure that the quality of the services they offered were of a consistently high standard. People we spoke with, and the staff, told us that people's views of the service were sought and acted upon.

23 February 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

One patient we spoke with said that although there were, "Things to do", they had chosen not to take part and preferred to stay in the lounge and watch the television. Some of the other patients, although unable to verbally tell us about their experiences about what it was like to be a patient on Maple 1, responded positively and demonstrated signs of well being, when staff and visitors engaged with them. However, we noted that this was not always the case due to the way that staff engaged with patients which failed to promote their sense of well-being.

Speaking on behalf of some of the patients, their visiting family members gave a range of scores to rate the quality of care provided, from "Satisfactory" to "Excellent".

Through speaking with two patients' family members we heard about their different experiences in respect of involvement and communication from ward staff. One patient's wife indicated that they were kept fully informed about their husband's care and treatment, "Right up to the last minute" and were included in the review process of their husband's care plan. However, another family told us that, in their view, a delay in their father's/husband's discharge was due to ineffective communication from ward staff to the authority (who was responsible for the discharge planning of the patient) and ineffective communication from ward staff to the patient's key family members. The patient said, "I want to know where I am going". Their family also expressed a sense of frustration as they felt they were not kept informed, by ward staff, about their relative's health progress.

10 December 2010

During an inspection in response to concerns

During our review we spoke with a number of people who use the trust's services.

Opinion regarding the quality of care experienced was mixed: some people felt their needs were being met while others did not. A number of people were able to confirm who their key nurse was and were aware of their care plans.

The trust also provided us with a copy of the results of a recently conducted independent survey of inpatients' views of the service. This found that almost three quarters of the people who responded felt their overall care during their stay had been good, very good or excellent.

The majority of the people we spoke with considered staff to be supportive. A number stated that staff are very busy and they can not always get time with their doctor or named nurse.

We also asked people who use the service their opinion on the trust's environment. Opinion was mixed, dependent on which service the person was using. People at the Cavell Centre in Peterborough were very positive about the environment while one person at Fulbourn Hospital was very distressed regarding her environment and stated that this made her 'feel rubbish'.

We raised all of these issues with the trust's management team immediately following each visit and have included a range of relevant actions for the trust to meet within this report.