Central and North West London 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

The service provided person-centred care. Patients benefited from structured support plans and meaningful activities. Family and carers were supported and involved in supporting patient needs. Staff supported patients with religious and cultural needs. Some challenges were noted with the storage and accessibility to patient care plans. The service was aware of these issues and were working on a plan to streamline processes.

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

Patients received responsive, personalised care and support that met their needs and reflected their preferences. Patients were empowered to co-produce their own care plan and support needs with staff and to ensure that they were involved in their pathway with the service.

Staff regularly met with patients to understand their views on care and treatment. These discussions took place in one-to-one meetings with their allocated member of staff and in multidisciplinary team meetings.

Staff engaged with patients’ families. Patients told us that staff involved their loved ones, and this made them feel supported. Partners told us that they felt involved and communication from staff was clear and supportive. They felt comfortable and well informed regarding their partners care and treatment plan.

The service provided appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailor to individual needs.

Staff made sure patients could access information on treatment and local services, in formats tailored to individual needs. Staff told us that they were mindful of patient’s individual needs and would factor this into their care and treatment. Patients told us that they were supported with their individual needs.

The service did not have one single building from which they conducted their treatment sessions. The service used family centres/hubs and because of this we did not see information boards for staff and patients with perinatal specific information. Staff told us that they would hand out leaflets and information to patients during one-to-one sessions.

Staff had access to equipment and information technology needed to do their work. Most staff worked in a hybrid manner. They would either attend visits at external venues or within the service user’s home.

Team managers had access to information to support them with their management role. This included information on the performance of the service, staffing and patient care. This information was presented and discussed in governance meetings.

The service gathered feedback from patients via questionnaires, in order to identify and make improvements to the service. Not all patients were aware of the formal complaints process.

Staff enabled patients to give feedback on the service they received. Patients were able to share their views via The Friends and Family Test (FFT) which could be completed online or in a paper form. There were easy-read versions as well as versions in languages other than English. Patients could also share their views through the Patient-rated Outcome and Experience Measure online.

Most patients and partners did not know how to make a complaint. They told us that this information was not shared with them directly. Patients said if they had any complaints, they would speak with staff in the first instance.

Most staff understood the policy on complaints and were aware of how to acknowledge and handle them if they were received.

In the last 12 months, the service had received 0 complaints.

The service made sure that everyone could access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

The service met the needs of its patients. Staff could visit service users within their own homes, or within external venues (family hubs, other Trust locations, maternity services) locally.

The service admitted patients from diverse religious and cultural backgrounds. Staff asked patients about their religious and cultural needs during their assessment.

The service employed staff from diverse backgrounds. This meant the service was able to utilise the ability of staff to speak to patients in their first language whenever this was possible.

Staff ensured that patients had easy access to interpreters and/or signers where required. Partners were able to give feedback via the Friends and Family Test (FFT) form. This information was used and discussed in team meetings.

The service provided an annual review regarding diversity in the workforce. Grade 8a and above must have a Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic person (BAME) on the panel. There were various staff equality networks available to staff within the trust.

Patients were supported to understand and make decisions about their future care and support, including those relating to potential medical and psychological needs.

The multidisciplinary team worked collaboratively with patients and their partners when planning for each patient’s discharge from the service. Cases were discussed in MDT and with patients. Depending on the presentation and their ongoing needs patients would be discharged back to their GP and/or another mental health service.

All patients were given the Single Point of Access telephone number and knew where to access care in an emergency. A discharge letter would be sent to the patient, GPs and the referrer.