Essex Partnership University NHS Foundation Trust

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good.

Patients had access to volunteering opportunities and activities in the community. There were therapeutic activities for patients to engage with. Staff made sure information was available to patients. For example, there was information available on smoking cessation, sexual safety and spirituality. Staff had discussions with patients about discharge early in treatment.

This meant people needs were met.

However, notifications were not always sent to external bodies as required. Managers did not always listen to concerns that were raised by staff and patients. Patients did not always have access to specialists to support them in their rehabilitation.

Most patients we spoke with did not know how to access an independent mental health advocate (IMHA). This is important to help patients understand their care and treatment.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Managers did not always ensure care was not person centred. One patient told us they felt ward round was rushed. Some care plans reflected individual needs were being met but we did not always see skill development included in care planning. This is important to help patients prepare for living in the community.

Staff took patients preferences into account. One patient told us they were supported by staff with their communication needs. There was evidence of physical health needs being met. For example, we found physical health needs, such as diabetes had been included in care planning. There were therapeutic activities available for patients to participate in. Staff supported patients with some activities outside of the ward, such as swimming and regular walks. Person centred care tailors support to individual needs.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Managers ensured that patients had access to opportunities in the community. We saw evidence of some patients engaging in volunteering opportunities. The trust told us that training and employment opportunities were discussed with patients and there was an employment specialist, who could provide support to patients that wanted paid or voluntary employment opportunities.

There were some activities available in the community. Staff at 439 Ipswich Road told us that activities could be planned in the community, such as swimming. Engaging with activities in the community promotes independence and helps to develop daily living skills to prepare patients for discharge.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Managers ensured that information was available to patients. There was a suggestions box on the ward. Managers told us that information could be given to patients in more accessible formats where required. For example, information could be printed in larger font or on coloured paper to support patient’s needs.

There was information available to patients on sexual safety, rights for informal patients, smoking cessation, spirituality, faith, equality diversity and inclusion. There were also compliments and complaints leaflets available. Providing information means that patients can make informed decisions.

The trust had an information governance and security policy, which included information on responsibilities of different staff members and training that should be completed. There was also a data protection and confidentiality policy, which included steps to take when reporting a breach. There was an information governance incident reporting procedure in place for staff to follow when an incident had been identified.

Governance, cyber security, confidentiality, data protection and record keeping were listed as mandatory training. Information governance training compliance for 439 Ipswich Road was 95%.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result.

Managers did not always listen to patient’s concerns. Where patients had raised concerns about the environment immediate action was not taken. There were 2 complaints made about the service over the last 6 months. One complaint was resolved locally by the service. The second complaint was investigated, and actions were taken to address the concerns raised. Failure to listen to patients concerns regarding safety incidents puts patients at risk of avoidable harm.

Staff did not always support patients to manage their care. We asked patients if they were able to access an independent advocate. Five patients did not know how to access an independent advocate, while 1 patient told us they did have access to an advocate. An independent mental health advocate supports patients to understand their rights under the Mental Health Act.

Patients felt comfortable with raising concerns with managers. One patient told us they had challenged their section, while another patient told us that staff “could listen more”.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff had discussions with patients about discharge, early in treatment. We found patients had expressed preferences for accommodation and families and care co-ordinators had been involved in discussions about discharge. Early discussion about discharge help with a smooth transition into the community.

There was a disabled access bedroom on the ground floor with suitable aids to support patients with mobility needs.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this.

Staff did not always listen to people who were likely to experience inequality in experience. For example, in one patient care notes there was reference to their autism diagnosis, but this was not reflected in their care plan. This means that care was not always tailored to the patients needs.

Patients we spoke with told us they would speak to staff if they had any concerns. There were suggestion boxes on the ward and community meetings were taking place.

There was an equality, diversity and human rights policy in place that was last reviewed in 2024. Equality, diversity and inclusion training compliance for staff at 439 Ipswich Road was 100%.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff supported people to plan for important life changes. Volunteering opportunities were explored with suitable patients. Skill development sessions were accessed by patients under occupational therapy. These were aimed at preparing individuals for work and education by supporting the development of basic skills including hygiene, appropriate dressing and communication.

Care plans reflected family involvement where consent had been given and were individualised. Care plans showed evidence of partnership working with care co-ordinators and community nurses. For example, we found that a diabetes nurse had been supporting a patient on the ward. We also found that crisis plans had been put in place.