North East London NHS Foundation Trust

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

Effective - this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last inspection we rated this key question good. We did not re-rate the service as a result of this inspection. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

• Staff held regular multidisciplinary meetings where they shared information about patients. The service had developed effective working relationships with other relevant teams outside the organisation.

• Most care plans were personalised, holistic and recovery orientated.

However,

• Not every young person had an up-to-date care plan. Staff did not share copies of care plans with patients and carers consistently.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Not every young person had an up-to-date care plan. We reviewed the audit of care plan compliance for the 3 months preceding our inspection. This indicated 25% of care plans were not completed. Although the service conducted a monthly audit of care planning, we found that staff did not audit the required sample of 10 care and treatment records in the 12 months preceding our inspection. Most months, 8 care and treatment records were audited, and in March 2025, this dropped to 4. Over 50% of care planning elements audited in March had gaps identified. However, the audit did not outline actions to be taken to address these.

Staff did not share copies of care plans with patients and carers consistently. We reviewed an audit which showed that fewer than a third of patients eligible for a care plan had been offered a copy. Seven of 9 parents/carers told us they did not have a copy of the young person’s care plan. One said: “I don’t think I’ve ever had a written plan.” Six carers said they did not receive written updates on their care. One told us: “It’s mainly verbal.” However, most carers said that staff involved them in discussions about the young person’s treatment choices.

We reviewed 10 care and treatment records. Staff completed comprehensive assessments, including the assessment of physical health needs where appropriate. For example, we saw a care plan for managing diabetes and staff worked with the patient’s GP to monitor their physical health. Most care plans were personalised, holistic and recovery orientated. They demonstrated patient and carer involvement and were updated when necessary. However, we found no care plan within one patient’s care and treatment records and the detailed recording of visits and meetings focused solely on medication management.

Carers’ views on the staff understanding of the young persons’ needs were mixed. Some carers we spoke with gave us examples of staff supporting individual needs. However, 2 carers felt that staff’s understanding of eating disorders and self-harm could be improved.

Staff held regular multidisciplinary meetings where they shared information about patients. The service had developed effective working relationships with other relevant teams outside the organisation. These included the youth justice team, crisis service, local authority social services, primary care and third sector organisations.

Feedback from partner organisations who regularly worked with the service was mostly positive. Some of their representatives told us the service participated in regular meetings and communicated effectively. Partners’ feedback indicated that the service engaged well in joint meetings, although one stakeholder felt the service could be more proactive in initiating those.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.