Leicestershire Partnership NHS 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

At our last inspection we rated caring as good. At this inspection the rating stayed as good.

Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all people who used services on admission. They developed individual care plans which were reviewed regularly through multidisciplinary discussion and updated as needed. Staff provided a range of treatment and care for people who used services based on national guidance and best practice. The team included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of people who used services. Staff from different disciplines worked together as a team to benefit people who used services.

This service scored 75 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

Across the crisis and home treatment teams staff treated people who used their services with compassion and kindness. They respected their privacy and dignity. They understood the individual needs of people who used their services and supported people to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. We observed staff treat people with kindness, compassion and empathy.

We observed staff speaking with people over the telephone and when attending their homes for treatment. They were kind and respectful and explained the role of the team and the purpose of the appointments they were setting up. Staff gave people help, emotional support and advice when they needed it. People who used the crisis service said staff treated them well and behaved kindly. We spoke to 6 people and they all said they felt involved in care planning, and staff were respectful and polite. They felt the service had been very beneficial to them.

At the health-based place of safety, staff gave patients help, emotional support and advice when they needed it. Staff told us they spent time talking with patients. We spoke to 3 former patients. They told us staff were friendly and polite. They treated patients with respect and offered encouragement and reassurance. One patient told us they always felt safe in the place of safety as staff were always with them. Where a MHA assessment did not result in detention, records showed staff arranged transport home at no cost to the patient. If patients preferred, staff contacted their families to collect them. Staff referred patients to their GP’s or community teams when they were not admitted to hospital.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service made adjustments for disabled patients. The crisis and home treatment teams and health-based places of safety (HBPoS) sites were all wheelchair accessible.

Staff received training in recognising and responding to autistic people and people with a learning disability. The Trust had Learning Disabilities and Autism e-learning in place and Learning Disabilities Tier 2 training was formally added as a training requirement in February 2025. This course was provided by the ICB with lived experience partners and each team had a planned trajectory for attending sessions. The compliance rates for the Learning Disabilities and Autism e-learning were 98% for the central point of access team and 100% for the mental health urgent care hub, the place of safety and the crisis teams. The compliance rates for the Learning Disabilities and Autism Tier 2 training was 78% for the central point of access team and 89% for the mental health urgent care hub, the place of safety and the crisis teams.

Staff could provide information in accessible formats and had access to British Sign Language translation services and interpretation services for people with English as a second language. Staff ensured that people who used their services and patients could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights, and how to complain.

In the morning planning meetings staff discussed the individual language needs of patients and how best to communicate with them including booking an interpreter. The teams had a diverse caseload with several people who needed an interpreter.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The Crisis Resolution Home Treatment Teams (CRHTT)promoted people’s independence, and ensured people had control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. When a person was seen by the team for the first time, staff would use the first visit protocol. This included sharing with the person the range of interventions available, and people could highlight what they felt they required. All teams had occupational therapists and psychologists in the team, and people could be referred to them depending on their needs.

There was joint work between nursing and medical staff to arrange additional appointments and appropriate medication, which could support the person staying in the community rather than having an inpatient admission.

People who used these services were given information to make decisions about their medication. Consultants, pharmacists and non-medical prescribers spoke with people about medication choices, side effects, monitoring and benefits. This meant people were able to make informed decisions about their medications. We saw evidence in care records that people’s requests to have medication reviews led to medication review appointments.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimize any discomfort, concern or distress.

The home treatment team staff were aware of and dealt with specific risk issues. There were daily service wide monitoring reviews for people who used the service and patients awaiting beds in a mental health hospital. Risk assessments for people and patients were reviewed daily at the morning meetings.

At the health-based place of safety staff responded to changing risks to patients. Patients we spoke to told us staff had explained their section and next steps in their care and treatment. They told us they had been supported to make calls to inform their families and carers to inform them of their whereabouts and care and treatment.

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

We spoke to 22 staff across the service. Staff we spoke to across the crisis service told us they enjoyed working in the service. They felt respected, valued, and were proud to work in the team. They told us management cared about their well-being and enabled them to deliver person centred care. Staff felt supported in their roles and were able to raise concerns with management. However, managers and staff told us they had felt additional pressure due to the staff vacancies in the team.

Staff had access to support for their own physical and emotional needs. Managers told us the trust had invested in staff wellbeing due to the role. This included a staff counselling service and staff reflective spaces every 2 weeks with a psychologist.

The service had lone working arrangements for staff in place. All visits to people who used the service were risk assessed, and if a person was unknown to the service or assessed as being high risk then 2 staff members would attend the appointment together. Staff had lone working devices and the use of these was monitored by managers to ensure they were used. If a staff member had not returned to the office at the time expected following a visit the shift co-ordinator would call them.

The provider recognised staff success within the service. Staff felt their work was recognised and success rewarded within their own teams. For example the trust had a trust wide award called “The Valued Star”. In 2024 a staff member from the crisis service won this award.

Managers supported staff to develop and gave them an annual appraisal of their work. The compliance rate for the crisis service was 94%.

Staff spoke positively about the range of development opportunities available and about how managers supported them to develop. We saw multiple examples of staff being supported to learn other roles, support other departments or have additional professional development.