Norfolk and Suffolk 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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We reviewed 15 care plans and saw that patients were involved in agreeing their care plans and positive behaviour support plans. Care plans were comprehensive and person-centred, reflecting patients’ individual physical, mental, emotional and social needs.

Therapeutic and recreational activities were tailored to meet the needs of the patient group, and each patient had an individualised timetable of activities. Staff tailored therapies to meet the needs of individual patients including adapted dialectical behavioural therapy and adapted pathways for patients with learning disability and autism.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Patients and carers knew how to complain or raise concerns, if they needed to. The service had not received any direct formal complaints in the 6 months prior to inspection but had 2 mental health act complaints submitted on behalf of 1 patient. Staff had met with the patient and actions were taken to address their concerns.

Staff enabled patients to give feedback on the service they received. Wards held weekly community meetings where patients could give feedback or make suggestions for improvements. Staff also asked patients to agree what activities they would like to have, where to go for any days out and food suggestions for barbecues and parties. Patients could also challenge any ward restrictions that would be reviewed at the Reducing Restrictive Practice meeting.

The service held a monthly ‘Stronger Together’ meeting for patients and carers to attend and discuss updates from each ward and the activities and projects that had taken place.

Wards provided a monthly service user engagement and feedback report to the locality assurance group for review, this included community meeting minutes and themes, event and projects with patient input, and any ‘you said, we did’ updates.

Staff provided patients with a ‘Patient Reported Experience Outcome Measures’ (PREOM) twice a year to rate their experience of care and the most recent results showed positive experiences from patients across the service.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of all policies and procedures to ensure they did not disadvantage vulnerable people or those with protected characteristics.

Patients we spoke with did not have any concerns about discrimination within the service and felt their religious and cultural needs were met.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity and human rights with 99% of staff having completed up to date training sessions.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.