Mersey Care NHS Foundation 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 assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good.

People were supported and treated with kindness, respect and involved as partners in their care.

During our inspection, patients, people and their carers gave consistently positive feedback across all services.

Staff accounted for different patient requirements, including leaflets in different languages, easy read documents and interpreter availability.

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 treated people with kindness, empathy, and compassion. Staff at the service treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed 3 calls from people who contacted first response hub by calling 111 and saw staff who were discreet, respectful and responsive. During observation of 2 handover meetings, staff spoke about people who used services with respect, empathy and understanding.

We spoke to 11 people who used services. They all felt supported by staff and with kindness and respect.

We spoke with 3 carers of people who used services. Feedback was consistently positive, they felt involved in their relative’s treatment plan and any proposed changes in medication were discussed beforehand.

We observed supportive and kind interactions between staff and patients in all the locations we visited.

The service received 24 responses to the friends and family test survey from January to April 2025. Seventeen people responded with very good and 5 responded with a good rating. Quotes from people who used services included:

• Nothing to improve, the team really do go above and beyond.
• Helping me see the light and have hope for my future.
• Team was there when I needed them and helped me turn my life around in a positive way.
• Each member treats me with respect and are not judgemental.

Staff directed people to other services when appropriate. Care plans that we reviewed showed evidence of this. Staff showed effective listening skills during observation of 111 calls and demonstrated appropriate signposting, dependant on the callers needs. We observed a complex case meeting where people had been referred to other services and new alternatives were explored.

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

The service made adjustments for disabled patients. All locations ensured full access for disabled people and staff ensured that disability access was recorded in each person’s care record where appropriate.

Staff communicated with patients and people so that they understood their care and treatment, including finding effective ways to communicate with patients with communication difficulties. Staff described different communication methods such as easy read documents and access to translator services.

Staff ensured that people who used services could obtain information on different topics such as treatments and availability of local services. Waiting areas and consulting rooms had a wide range of leaflets that were available in different languages.

In the HBPoS, patients had a choice of food to meet the dietary requirements of religious and ethnic groups and to account for allergies and intolerances.

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

Care records of people showed evidence of people being offered a choice of services available to them. Crisis Resolution Home Treatment (CRHT) teams encouraged people to be in control of their own medication and enable independence.

During observation of 111 calls, staff recognised the independence of people by signposting them to other organisations, such as substance misuse services or open therapy groups.

Patients in the health-based places of safety and people who used crisis services could access advocacy from an independent service and posters were displayed in clinical areas, with contact details also available on the service website.

Staff from Crisis Resolution Home Treatment (CRHT) teams described a wide range of support groups that were available to people. Examples of these were knitting, singing and games groups. Staff said they had received positive feedback from people who used services.

People said the service, “facilitated appointments around my life,” and they were, “offered base or home visits depending on my requirements” when providing feedback via the service's friends and family test from January 2025 to April 2025.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views, and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs at that moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff in HBPoS locations were made aware of patient risk following handover from police and reviewed existing information held on their computer systems.

Staff in the Crisis Resolution Home Treatment (CRHT) teams discussed risks of people using services during regular handover meetings each day. Care records held accurate risk assessments, care plans and were updated as soon as people’s risk factors changed.

Staff identified and responded to changing risks to, or posed by, people who used services. We observed daily handover meetings where specific risks were identified and discussed. Neither of the Crisis Resolution Home Treatment (CRHT) teams had a waiting list for their caseloads.

Health-based place of safety (HBPoS) staff worked closely with police and Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHP) to ensure least restrictive practice was used with distressed patients.

All staff were trained in conflict resolution as part of mandatory training and used de-escalation techniques to reduce the need for physical intervention when patients became distressed.

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

Staff were proud to work for the service and with their team members. Staff felt respected, supported and valued and could raise concerns to managers.

Staff were aware of physical and emotional support available to them and knew how to access it. Staff said managers supported them following a serious incident.

The service’s staff sickness and absence were similar to the average for the provider. In March 2025, only 2 teams were above the service sickness target rate of 6%, North response hub at 18.84% and North Mersey CRHT at 13.84%.

Staff appraisals included conversations about career development and how they could be supported. Managers met with staff to discuss their career aspirations during yearly appraisal meetings. Data provided to us illustrated overall compliance at 84% with both CRHT teams and first response hubs at over 90%.

The provider recognised staff success within the service. In September 2024, the services’ Mental Health triage and response team won a national award at the annual Health and Safety Journal (HSJ) awards ceremony. This recognised the service’s collaborative work between health services and police. The judges commented that ‘Mersey Care's approach has the potential to inspire positive transformation in mental health care far beyond its own setting’.