leicestershire partnership nhs trust valuesleicestershire partnership nhs trust values

Staff had not routinely recorded whether they had given patients copies of their care plans and we saw this in a considerable number of patient records we sampled. Whilst staff were working hard to identify and manage individual risks, some ward environments were unacceptable. Sixty per cent of staff working in the mental health services had attended supervision and 64% of staff working in community health inpatient services. There were problems with access to the electronic system owing to ongoing building works. The acute wards for adults of working age had not complied with all of the required actions following the previous inspection of September 2013. View more Profession Nurse Service Child & Adolescent / CAMHS Grade Band 5 Contract Type Permanent Hours Full Time. There was use of bank and agency staff. Staff did not always follow trust policies and procedures when they needed to search patients or their bedrooms to keep them safe from harm. Some improvements were seen in seclusion documentation and seclusion environments. The trust could not ensure continuity of care for these patients. The rating for well-led in mental health services, improved to requires improvement. There was good multi-disciplinary working within the teams and good communication with other organisations. For example, issues found in risk assessments, care plans and environmental concerns had been addressed in some services, but not all since our last inspection. There was no patient alarm access in four ward areas, including the dormitories. The transition from the CAMHS LD service to adult teams was not always timely and, therefore, did not follow best practice. Patients were involved in the writing of their care plans and their views were reflected in the plans. long stay or rehabilitation wards for working age adults. Staff interacted with the patients in a positive way and was respectful to them. The trust had robust arrangements in place for the receipt and scrutiny of detention paperwork. Nottingham, Local audits were not completed regularly. This included environmental improvements, shared sleeping accommodation, response times to maintenance issues, care planning and access to relevant therapies in certain services. Staff felt supported by their immediate managers but felt disaffected with trust senior management. Staff were not meeting targets for the assessment and assessment to treatment of urgent referrals and six week routine referrals. Staff were not always recording room and fridge temperatures in clinical rooms and out of date nutrional supplement drinks had not been appropriately disposed of. New systems were in place for staff to report any repairs or maintenance issues. There was a mobile phone in the ward office that patients could use for private calls, for example to a solicitor. Staff gave examples of initiatives such as the chief executives blog and the presentation of the valued star award. A further review was an examination of processes and procedures within the trust for reporting investigations and learning from serious incidents requiring investigation. Staff showed high levels of motivation and morale, felt part of a positive team and felt well supported and trained. Morale was found to be poor in some areas and some staff told us that they did not feel engaged by the trust. We found: However, we noted one issue that could be improved: We spoke with six members of staff including matrons, team leaders and mental health practitioners and reviewed all the assessment areas the adult psychiatric liaison team uses. Not all patients on acute wards for adults of working age could summon help from staff if required. A new leadership structure had been introduced since the last inspection and had not yet fully embedded in the service. Staff spoke of feeling supported by team leaders and team leaders felt supported by their managers. The quality of some of the data was poor. Beaumont ward did not have a poster displayed around informal patients and rights as a patient had ripped it down. The service was not meeting its performance targets. Patients did not have access to regular community meetings where they would discuss ward issues and concerns. Wards had well equipped clinic rooms with appropriate equipment which staff regularly checked. Derby, Therefore, the trust could not be sure staff received information to support best practice and change in a timely manner. Immediate concerns raised by patients on those visits are discussed, if appropriate, with hospital staff. Records were stored securely and well managed by staff to ensure that sensitive information about patients was protected. Not all care plans reflected patients assessed needs, or were personalised, holistic and recovery oriented. We will be working with them to agree an action plan to improve the standards of care and treatment. All the team leaders we interviewed said there were internal waiting lists for patients who had been initially assessed to access profession specific treatments. Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust This is an organisation that runs the health and social care services we inspect Overall: Requires improvement Services have been transferred to this provider from another provider Services have been transferred to this provider from another provider All Inspections 12 April 2022 The environment in the crisis service did not ensure confidentiality as rooms were not sound proofed and conversations could be heard outside the room. The short stay services did not comply with the guidance on the elimination of mixed sex accommodation. There were improvements in ligature risk assessments. The trust ensured that people who used services, the public, staff and external partners were engaged and involved in the design of services. We rated safe, effective, responsive and well led as requires improvement and caring as good. The trust had new seclusion paperwork implemented in May 2019. Staff did not always have time to attend clinical supervision sessions and patient information systems were inconsistently utilised and did not always enable effective working. However, they did not always meet the required skill mix for the nursing teams. There was no process in place for learning from other organisations which provided similar services or to share this services best practice. Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust | 5,409 followers on LinkedIn. The trust employed registered general nurses (RGN) to assist with assessment and management of physical healthcare needs for patients. Staff could not rely on performance reports being accurate. At the Willows, six out of 19 patients risk assessments had not been updated. There were different recording systems in place, for example paper records and electronic records, different professional kept separate files. There was no evidence of patient involvement recorded in some of the notes. This employer has not claimed their Employer Profile and is missing out on connecting with our community. the service isn't performing as well as it should and we have told the service how it must improve. This was highlighted in the previous inspection. Meeting these standards and developing the capability to exceed them, will not only ensure that we continue to improve and respond flexibly to changing needs as an organisation, but will also help our staff to fulfil their potential, both in terms of personal achievement and career advancement. This was an issue highlighted at our inspection in 2018. Patients had the use of their mobile phones on the ward. This did not protect the privacy and dignity of patients when staff undertook observations. Bed occupancy for the last two quarters of 2013/14 was around 89%. We identified concerns around the storage of medicines in community hospitals, with missing opened or expiry dates across all hospitals. Staff were caring and committed to providing high quality care and showed a person-centred approach. Our judgement is based on a combination of what we found when we inspected, information from our Intelligent Monitoring system, and information given to us from people who use services, the public and other organisations. Delivered through over 100 settings from inpatient wards to out in the community, our 6,500 staff serves over 1 million people living in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland. Following the appointment of a new chief executive a new trust board was formed. The quality of data was variable, for example training statistics were not always reliable. Staff were not in receipt of regular supervision in order to discuss training needs, developmental opportunities or performance issues. The duty system enabled urgent referrals to be seen quickly. Access to treatment for specialist community mental health services for children and young people, Maintaining the privacy and dignity of patients and concordance with mixed sex accommodation, Seclusion environments and seclusion paper work. We inspected all key lines of enquiry in all domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led) in two services. There was a range of large therapeutic areas and rooms for art therapy plus other interventions. Staff and senior leaders could not articulate the trusts direction of travel and how this was co-ordinated. Staff monitored patients physical health regularly from the point of admission. The trust recognised this was not an appropriate target and was working with commissioners to negotiate a more appropriate target. Due to the lack of a trust overarching strategy, the BAF did not provide an effective oversight against strategic objectives, gaps in control and assurance. When staff raised concerns or ideas for improvement, they felt they were not always taken seriously. At Melton, Rutland and Harborough and Charnwood there was a lack of audits and little focus on quality and improvement. Some facilities lacked essential emergency equipment. The summary of this service appears in the overall summary of this report. Patients knew how to formally complain and could attend daily community meetings where they could raise any issues of concern. Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust | 4,712 followers on LinkedIn. The summary for this service appears in the overall summary of this report. Employees also rated Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust 3.1 out of 5 for work life balance, 3.6 for culture and values and 3.7 for career opportunities. All ward ligature risk assessmentshad beenreviewed and were located on each ward together with mitigation summaries. It's a mission driven by our core values, and one that we try to achieve as a local provider, funder, and advocate. Patient access to psychology and occupational therapy was less than expected on acute wards and rehabilitation wards due to the number of staff vacancies in therapy positions. Managers completed ligature audits which highlighted what mitigation was in place to reduce the risk for patients. Some actions were required to ensure adherence with the Mental Health Act. Support workers were being trained in phlebotomy to improve timely blood testing. We rated the four mental health core services as requires improvement and community health services for adults as good. There were delays in maintenance and repairs in some areas. Staff did not record seclusion well. The group established a deliberate self harm and suicide group in the last year to oversee specific incidents of this nature. Wards employed additional healthcare support workers to meet patient needs when needed. Through this collaborative working we are also building a culture of continuous improvement and learning, supported by a robust governance framework and more sustainable and efficient use of resources. We saw evidence of discharge planning in care plans written by CRHT staff. Engagement with external stakeholders had significantly improved since our last inspection. They were supported to have training to help them to develop additional skills and expertise. The trust had begun the process of replacing some beds with more suitable options for the patient group. Ward matrons told us they shared outcomes from incident investigations in team meetings for shared leaning. Safeguarding was a high priority with regular safeguarding reviews within each area of speciality and established systems for supporting staff dealing with distressing situations. We will continue to keep our values of Compassion, Respect, Integrity, Trust at the centre of everything we do. Bathrooms and toilets were specified for which gender depending on who was resident at the unit at the time. The service was not well led. Staff did not effectively complete risk assessments for patients, manage a smoke free environment, or share information about incidents or share learning from incidents within teams, across services or between services in the trust. Requires improvement Patients were frequently not discharged when ready due to transport problems or difficulties putting care packages in place. The trust had significantlyreduced waiting times and the total numbersof children and young people waiting for assessments. The single point of access made contacting the service easy for both patients and health professionals and enabled referrals into the service to be triaged and assigned from one central point. Patients and their relatives felt involved in the care provided. The trust had made significant improvements to develop a strengthened vision and strategy. Let's make care better together. Staff we spoke with were proud to work within the adult psychiatric liaison team and proud to show us the work they did and the service they provided. The trust had not fully addressed the issues of poor lines of sight in wards. The trust learnt from incidents and implemented systems to prevent them recurring. Patients reported they were treated with dignity and respect. Patients felt safe. Staff demonstrated poor understanding of some aspects of the Mental Capacity Act. The HBPoS had no designated resuscitation equipment and emergency medication and shared equipment with acute wards. Staff told us patients were concealing lighters and cigarettes and bringing them onto wards. Managers had a system in place for tracking and learning from safeguarding incidents and other reportable events. Some families carers said that the meals were unhealthy. Staff informed us there was a safeguarding lead to refer to when guidance was needed. We inspected three mental health inpatient services because of the ratings from the previous inspection. An announcement has been made on the outcome of this appointment. Apply. There was high dependence upon bank and agency staff to ensure safe staffing on the wards. Mandatory training that fell below 75% included adult immediate life support, adult basic life support, safeguarding children level 3 and fire safety awareness. We remain concerned that a significant period had passed and the trust had not improved access to psychology for patients and staff. A report on the inspection was . In five of the six community nursing teams attendance on some mandatory training courses was below 70%. In the same service, managers did not always review incidents in a timely way. We did not inspect the following core services previously rated as requires improvement: We did not inspect the following core services previously rated as good: We are monitoring the progress of improvements to services and will re-inspect them as appropriate.

Advanced Rocketry Core Status Not Ready, Lookism Daniel's Body, Edmond Public Schools Lunch Menu, Angela And Marcus Why Did I Get Married, Accenture New York 1 Manhattan West,