Lancashire & South Cumbria 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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. At our last inspection we rated this key question as good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

Patients were at the centre of how their care was planned and delivered. Managers had worked to develop better communication with other services to develop safer discharge procedures.

The patients we spoke with told us they knew how to complain, and they felt that they could make a complaint if they needed to, and that staff would take their complaint seriously. Staff understood how to support patients to make a complaint, and managers investigated and responded to complaints in line with the providers policy.

We saw that patients could access the care and support they needed. Individual needs were recognised, and patients were support with those needs, for example dietary or language. Reasonable adjustments and support were available for autistic people and people with a learning disability.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

All staff had received an induction and the appropriate training. They could identify where they could access support if a patient had difficulty with translating speech or other communication problems. Staff could access services when they needed to, including out of normal hours and in an emergency. They felt supported to overcome barriers to ensure equal access for patients. Managers gave examples of where adjustments had been made or were already in place to support patients who may have accessibility or mobility needs. Staff and managers described how patients would be supported with any spiritual or cultural needs that they may have. Staff also described how any dietary needs would be supported for any patients that had specific requirements for cultural or religious reasons. Managers and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage a patients experience and access to treatment and support. Providers used people’s feedback and other evidence to actively seek to improve access for people more likely to experience barriers or delays in accessing their care. Advocacy was available for all patients, and they confirmed they had one to one therapeutic time with their named nurse, where they could raise any concerns about potential inequities in their experiences. We saw that Managers monitored complaints and concerns as part of the senior manager meeting processes. There had been 118 complaints generated in 2024 across the service. Dova unit (five not upheld, four partly, two upheld and one withdrawn)and Stevenson (four not upheld, seven upheld and one being investigated) had the most with 12 each. Out of the 118 complaints, 65 were either not upheld or partially upheld. Eight were still being investigated. Out of these six had been forwarded to the Ombudsman with four closed with no further action, one still being investigated and one upheld regarding a dispute about leave.

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

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.