leicestershire partnership nhs trust valuesrebisco company swot analysis

We observed care being delivered in a kind and caring way, by staff who demonstrated compassion and experience. there are some services which we cant rate, while some might be under appeal from the provider. It's really rewarding. Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust | 4,712 followers on LinkedIn. Download the leadership behaviours booklet or watch the animation below to find out more: Our People Plan shows our dedication to making LPT a great place to work and receive care. Oct 2015 - Apr 20193 years 7 months. Staff were not meeting targets for the assessment and assessment to treatment of urgent referrals and six week routine referrals. Between August 2015 and July 2016 the trust had a total of 372 delayed discharges. The service was responding to complaints and implementing systems following these, however the trust waited for these complaints to prompt improvements in the service. The senior occupational therapist was trying to recruit to vacant occupational therapy posts. Claim your Free Employer Profileto start telling your employer brand story to reach top talent. Staff told us that the trust were recruiting for their vacancies and they hoped to have a full complement of staff in the coming months. For example, for adepot injection,a slow-release slow-acting form of medication. Staff told us there were no service information leaflets available. received 41 comment cards from patients that were available for patients to complete during the time of our inspection. At least one standard in this area was not being met when we inspected the service and However, managers had identified funding for two agency nurses to start work the week following the inspection. 8 February 2017. Engagement and joint planning between departments was well developed. There were no records of capacity being assessed for patients consent to treatment, and no clear evidence of best interests decisions being agreed. The trust had made some improvements in response to the previous CQC inspection undertaken in March 2015.This included removing some ligature anchor points in the acute mental health wards. Staff received Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Some staff did not demonstrate a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act. Staff were not supervised in line with the trust's policy. Staff morale in some teams was low, with high levels of stress. The HBPoS did not have designated staff provided by the trust. To address this deficit the trust moved patients that required an acute bed to a rehabilitation bed which was not clinically justified or met the needs of the patients. There had been several serious incidents (SI) within this service in the last year. Significant vacancy rates and high sickness levels put additional pressure on substantive staff. In addition to this, risk assessments were comprehensive and reviewed as per the trust policy, six monthly or after risk incidents. We found loose papers in records. Incidents were on the agenda at the clinical governance meetings. Our rating of this service stayed the same. A family member spoke about enjoying regular meetings in the service gardens with their relative. Staff felt supported by their immediate managers but felt disaffected with trust senior management. We noted, however, that staff maintained close observation when this occurred and considered this less stressful for patients than sourcing out of area beds. The trust had robust systems in place which allowed staff to effectively report incidents. Patients were protected from avoidable harm and abuse, systems were in place to investigate incidents and concerns and staff received suitable training in safety systems. Six staff expressed concerns about the proposed move and some said the trust had not communicated information to staff effectively. criminal justice and liaison services and triage teams had good morale and worked well with internal and external colleagues. If this service has not had a CQC inspection since it registered with us, our judgement may be based on our assessment of declarations and evidence supplied by the service. Access to rooms to undertake activities in the community for people with autism had been reduced. The offer is for 250 to be paid through payroll and subject to tax and National Insurance and is non pensionable. This report describes our judgement of the quality of care provided by Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust. Since our 2017 inspection, the trust had not fully ensured that clinical premises where patients received care where safe, clean well equipped, well maintained and fit for purpose. Staff felt that they had opportunities to develop and were supported to undertake further study. It was clear to see the difference the investment and improvements had made since our last visit. The service was not safe. Six further patients across Beaumont, Ashby and Heather wards told us that not all staff were caring or respectful. Staff were unable to show us evidence of clinical audits or the basis of evidence based practice in end of life services. Staff interacted with people in a positive way and were person centred in their approach. Whilst there was a plan to eradicate the dormitories across the trust, there were delays to the timetable and patients continued to share sleeping accommodation which compromised their privacy. Staff mostly felt positive about their managers and said that the services provided were well-led. The service was caring. Thy are entitled to receive a remuneration of 13,000 per annum each and have . For example relating to assessment of ligature points at Westcotes. Staff did not demonstrate a good understanding of the Mental Health Act (MHA) and Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The trust reported a 10% increase in the number of referrals received into the CAMHS service. Inadequate Concerns about high bed occupancy, record keeping and delayed discharges were identified in the March 2015 inspection and had not been sufficiently addressed. Care records showed that physical health examinations were completed upon admission and there was ongoing monitoring of physical health across the trust. We rated safe, effective, caring and responsive as good and well led as requires improvement. In most services, we were concerned with the lack of evidence in care plans which showed patients and carers had been consulted and involved in their care. Seclusion environments were not an issue of concern at this inspection. We are proud of our 5,400 staff and together we aim to . The service had seven vacancies for qualified nurses andthree for non-registered nurses. wards for people with a learning disability or autism. We found out of date and non-calibrated equipment located within a cupboard in the health-based place of safety. We identified concerns around the storage of medicines in community hospitals, with missing opened or expiry dates across all hospitals. At West Leicestershire there was a lack of psychology input. Our values are Compassion, Respect, Integrity and Trust, which we keep at the heart of everything we do. We spoke with five informal patients at the Bradgate Mental Health Unit who were unaware of what they could and could not do as an informal patient. Comprehensive assessments were being carried out and information was stored securely, except for one location and arrangements were in place to address this. The phones on each ward were in communal areas; the phone on Griffin ward had not been moved since the last inspection, although it had a privacy hood installed. All three service inspections were unannounced. This area of our site lists our partner organisations. There was no fridge to keep medicines cool when required. Waiting times for referral to initial assessment appointments were good, although patients experienced delays for community paediatric clinic follow up appointments. 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. We don't rate every type of service. However, they were not updated regularly or following an incident. . Staff did not always feel actively engaged or empowered. We rated it as requires improvement because: Our rating of the trust stayed the same. The trust had robust arrangements in place for the receipt and scrutiny of detention paperwork. Staff provided patients and carers with information in a way that they understood.At City West, City East, and South Leicestershire patients and their carers reported outstanding and good care. Services were planned and delivered in a way that met the current and changing needs of the local population. Within mental health services the quality of care plans was variable. There were not always enough staff who were suitably qualified and experienced to safely meet patients needs. 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. At the last inspection, we issued enforcement action because the trust did not have systems and processes across services to ensure thatthe risk to patients were assessed, monitored, mitigated and the quality of healthcare improved in relation to: The trust was required to make significant improvements in the following core services where we found concerns in the areas listed above: Acute wards for adults of working age and psychiatric intensive care units, Wards for people with a learning disability or autism, Long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults. This had improved since the last inspection in March 2015. The trust had ensured patients privacy and dignity were maintained when receiving physical health observations at the Bradgate Mental Health Unit. Staff received feedback on the outcomes on investigation of complaints via their managers. For example, furniture was light and portable and could be used as a weapon. However, staff did not consistently record patients views in their care plan or ensure they had received a copy. We did not identify any significant community wide areas for improvement but did find many exemplary services provided by the trust. Some risk assessments had not been reviewed regularly at The Grange. Patients could approach staff at night to request them. All the people who used services and the carers spoken to were happy with the service they had received and spoke positively about their interactions with staff. The Health Trust HIV/AIDS Services program delivers groceries to homebound seniors and adults throughout Santa Clara County. We found concerning evidence of long waiting times for assessment in specialist community mental health services for children and young people. Apply. Staff did not always record or update comprehensive risk assessments. There were good systems for lone-working which included a code word that staff used when they required assistance. Medication management had improved significantly across the services. Fire safety was much improved, withfire drills carried out regularly. We found serious concerns with medication disposal, storage, labelling and management of controlled drugs. The trust had addressed the issues regarding the health based place of safety identified in the previous inspection. There were delays in maintenance and repairs in some areas. We inspected all key lines of enquiry in all domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led) in two services.

Hunter Twist And Lock Glass Shade, Elgin High School Football Schedule 2021, Why Is He So Quiet Around Me All Of A Sudden, Articles L