Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health 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

We looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all patients on admission, ensuring relevant information was collected to inform the development of individualised care plans. Care plans were developed for each patient and reviewed regularly through multidisciplinary discussions, with updates made as required to reflect changes in patient needs, risks, or treatment goals. Staff provided a range of treatment and care based on national guidance and recognised best practice, ensuring interventions were evidence-based, safe, and responsive to the diverse needs of patients. The staff team included, or had access to, the full range of specialists required to meet patient needs, ensuring appropriate professional input was available to support complex physical and mental health requirements. Staff from multiple disciplines worked collaboratively, combining their expertise and coordinating effectively to ensure that care and treatment decisions were comprehensive, consistent, and promoted safe, positive, and person-centred outcomes for patients. However, there was often no clear record of formal capacity assessments being carried out or established consent arrangements within the electronic care records system.

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. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff attitudes and behaviours when interacting with patients showed that they were discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it. Staff were caring and supportive toward patients. Staff spent time with patients, listened to them, and encouraged patients to talk through their problems. Staff said that showing respect, understanding and compassion was a core part of their job.

Patients said they felt respected, cared for, and valued. They described staff as kind, professional and attentive, and said they were helpful, understanding, and compassionate, often going the extra mile to provide high-quality care.

The majority of patients said they understood their medication and treatment plans and felt that staff explained things clearly in a way that was easy to understand.

Staff understood the individual needs of patients, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs. For example, at multidisciplinary team meetings, staff demonstrated they had known patients for a long time and were able to provide a detailed information about this history, background and context of each patient’s presentation. This included a good understanding of the views of both patients and their families.

Staff said they felt able to raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients without fear of the consequences.

Staff maintained the confidentiality of information about patients. For example, all information about patients was stored on an electronic patient record. This record could only be accessed by entering a personal username and password.

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 worked to promote equality in various ways, including implementing the Patient and Carer Race Equality Framework (PCREF), operating an equalities group, and holding cultural awareness days. It was also working to provide culturally appropriate dementia care and to increase engagement with underserved community groups in the area.

The services worked with patients from diverse ethnic groups. Staff were able to translate information for patients using an online translation application.

Managers ensured that staff and patients had easy access to interpreters and/or signers. The services arranged interpreters whenever they were needed. Many patients asked family members to attend appointments with them to assist with interpretation. The service could also access British Sign Language interpreters when needed.

The service ensured that patients had access to information about treatments, local services, and how to raise concerns. Posters in waiting areas highlighted this information, some of which was also available in large print and in alternative languages.

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

Staff supported patients to make choices and decisions about their care. For example, staff offered patients choice about whether to take medication. Staff did not insist on patients having an assessment if they did not want to. Staff explained that some patients did not wish to know whether they had dementia or not. In these circumstances, staff continued to support patients without there being a formal diagnosis.

Overall, patients reported having choice and control over their care and treatment, feeling that their wishes were acknowledged - for example, one patient shared that when they asked for appointment times later in the morning the service adjusted the schedule to better meet their needs.

The service referred and signposted individuals to advocacy services when required, with posters displayed in the waiting areas providing clear information about the advocacy support available to patients.

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

We observed staff listening carefully to patients and responding promptly, sensitively and compassionately when immediate needs arose. Staff were skilled at adapting their approach in the moment to minimise anxiety or discomfort.

Each team assigned a member of staff to the duty desk each day during office hours. The duty worker could respond promptly to request for assistance. Outside office hours, patients or their families could contact the trust’s crisis line. When patients required an admission to hospital, this was usually arranged within a few days.

Patients described how staff visited them at home to provide care when attending the clinic was not practical or suitable. For example, when mobility issues made it difficult for them to attend the clinic. In addition, video consultations were offered where appropriate, particularly for patients who had difficulty attending appointments in person.

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

Of the 26 staff we spoke to, the majority felt positive and proud about working for the provider and their team. Most staff were very positive about their work. Whilst acknowledging there could be ‘highs’ and ‘lows’, most staff felt that teams worked well together. Staff said they were motivated by having a positive impact on the lives of older people. However, staff said that whilst they supported each other, it was difficult to maintain morale when their service was short of staff.

The service supported staff wellbeing through a variety of initiatives, including away days, reflective practices, yoga, relaxation sessions, and walking groups.

The service had introduced staff well-being sessions each month, facilitated by a psychologist, to provide the opportunity for staff to support each other. The occupational health team provided assessments when staff or managers requested this.

The trust recognised staff success within the service via ‘Excellence nominations’. Staff could nominate and recognise colleagues who had demonstrated outstanding commitment, compassion and professionalism. Nominations highlighted colleagues going above and beyond to support service users, carers and teams, including providing exceptional care, responding to complex or crisis situations, advocating for vulnerable individuals, and supporting colleagues during periods of pressure.