Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust

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 looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last inspection, we rated this key question good. At this inspection, the rated has remained good. We observed positive and caring interactions between staff and people. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

The service ensured that people using the service were supported by staff in an appropriate and supportive manner, treated them with kindness and understood their individual needs.

Staff attitudes and behaviours when interacting with people showed that they were friendly, respectful and responsive, providing people with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it. We observed positive and kind interactions between staff on both our day and out of hours visit.

Staff supported people to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. Staff provided one-to-one sessions with people and carers to go through their risk assessments, care plan and options for therapeutic activities. Staff supported people to engage in meaningful activities. We observed a community meeting where a person had requested to do some cooking that day, the staff discussed with the person what they would like to cook and the ingredients they would need to use, and staff facilitated this activity.

People said staff treated them well, were kind and supportive and were available when they needed support, carers also said staff were really helpful, supportive, welcoming and open to ideas on how to best support their relative.

Staff understood the individual needs of people, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs. Staff supported people to maintain and develop their social skills and meet their sensory needs through various activities and tools.

Staff followed policy to keep people’s information confidential. Information held on electronic systems was protected. Paper records were held in the nursing station which was kept locked.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure their care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences, considering their strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture, backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff within the service had a good understanding of people’s mental health, their risk history and their social circumstances outside of the hospital. Occupational therapists supported people to pursue their interests and hobbies. For example, staff supported a person who enjoyed drawing and painting to do this, and they were able to personalise their room with their artwork.

People said they always felt involved in their care and treatment and felt able to make suggestions. One carer said they felt the whole package of care was individualised to their relative’s needs and staff were flexible around things such as the food provided on the ward.

The service did not always promote people’s independence, so they knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People and carers told us that staff met with them regularly to review care plans and positive behaviour support plans, they felt they were included in care and treatment and able to contribute. However, we reviewed 1 person’s care records, and the person’s voice was not always clearly documented.

Staff had co-produced tools with people to support their care, a person had worked with staff to produce something that would help them monitor how they were feeling each day, the person and staff had found this useful, and we observed this being discussed between staff at handover. People were provided with a variety of therapeutic and recreational activities to join, to support their skills and wellbeing.

Staff ensured people could access information on their rights and how to complain. Information about the Mental Health Act and making complaints was displayed on the ward. People were supported to understand their rights by using different ways to communicate, the ward had easy read documents for people that used them.

People and carers were positive about the food and said that people’s individual needs and preferences were catered to. People had supervised access to the kitchen, this had been risk assessed and regularly reviewed. Staff supported people in the kitchen when they wanted to access drinks and snacks, however, on our first visit the fridge and cupboards did not contain milk or any food. There was also a hot water urn in the small kitchen which was unsafe for people to use to make a drink. People had a snack box that contained chocolate and sweets. This concern had been raised at an external review of the service but had not been acted on. On our out of hours visit a week later we observed a variety of drinks and snacks on the dining room table for people to access, people said that they could always get drinks and snacks when they wished and staff opened the kitchen when requested.

The service listened to and understood people’s views and wishes. They responded to these and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People told us that staff were mindful of their privacy and confidentiality. We observed interactions between staff and people who used the service and saw that these relationships were caring and compassionate, enabling staff to anticipate and meet people’s needs quickly and in ways that reduced and mitigated people’s discomfort and distress. Staff had co-produced a safety plan with a person that enabled staff to best support the person when they were feeling distressed.

People told us they felt listened to and their feelings were respected. People felt able to approach staff with concerns. We observed people seeking staff support when they had things they wished to discuss. People also felt able to voice their feelings and give feedback in community meetings.

The ward had a new sensory room, which had been co-designed with people using the service, the sensory room was a nice space, with a variety of sensory equipment that had been chosen by people. Staff said the sensory room was used frequently, a person on the ward, would sometimes request to sleep over in the sensory room, which staff had facilitated.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of staff and supported and enabled them to deliver person centred care.

Staff had access to chaplaincy and spiritual care, which provided for the spiritual and religious wellbeing needs of staff.

Adjustments were made for staff to support them in their roles. This included reasonable adjustments to working patterns, implementing a flexible working pattern, alongside adjusting staff duties if there were any changes to their physical health.

The service had an employee wellbeing offer for staff. This included an employee assistance programme, psychological support, fast track physiotherapy, post-incident support and occupational health.

The service displayed thank you cards received from discharged people and their relatives/carers, as well as from student nurses who had completed their placements on the ward. Success and recognitions were recorded in the service’s supervision records which had a praise section. The celebration and successes for individuals and the whole team were also shared trust wide via internal communication articles. The ward’s chef had been recognised for their passion for their work, and the matron had received a high commendation in the trust wide hero and lifetime achievement awards. The service had been recognised for the new sensory room which had been co-designed with people using the service.

Staff told us morale at the service had significantly improved recently. The service had a new ward manager who staff said was approachable, supportive and engaged with staff. Staff said they found senior leaders at the service very supportive. Staff and leaders had identified areas where staff required more support. Extra training had been organised for staff and regular discussions had been had with staff in team meetings and supervisions.