Northern Healthcare Head Office

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

Staff and people supported had developed good relationships. This was observed by the onsite inspector, communicated by staff in interviews and also through feedback from people gathered by the provider and supplied as evidence. The equality and diversity of people were respected. We observed lots of positivity statements displayed on a notice board at the time of the assessment. People supported could add to these at any time. The service had also made nominations for staff at the National Care Awards. People were supported to pursue hobbies and interests independently or with support. The service advertised local events and self-help groups within the properties. An Occupational Therapist [OT] support worker was in post and covered 2 sites. The OT provided group and 121 activities, to enable people to access the community. We observed no restrictions on people leaving the service or visitors; people were seen coming and going throughout the days spent on site.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People continued to receive the right levels of support they needed to lead their lives. They were able to exercise choice and control over their daily lives and the support they received. The provider tried to ensure wherever possible that staff were matched to support people with similar interests and personalities to help foster more meaningful relationships. People had submitted compliments about the service and staff. In a recent survey one person had written, “The staff are very good, supportive and professional in the work they do.”

We joined a morning handover at one of the houses we visited. Staff were respectful towards the people they supported and voiced any concerns about people’s preferred lifestyles in non-judgemental ways. Staff were genuinely concerned for people and explored ways in which they could promote positive outcomes for people. A member of staff told us how they would use different approaches depending on a person’s mood and said, “What works today might not work tomorrow.” Staff were fully aware of the company’s PROUD values and ensured these were reflected when delivering care and support to people. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and support, based on people’s needs and their personal preferences.

Feedback we received from partners was positive. A care co-ordinator had praised staff at one service for making someone admitted into a crisis placement feel safe and settled. A commissioner stated staff went ‘the extra mile’ for people.

We observed lots of positivity statements on a blackboard in a corridor at one of the houses. People could add to this if they wished. When speaking to staff there was pride in the role and kindness shown towards people they supported. Staff considered teamwork was really good; there was respect shown for other colleagues, as well as good support from wider management.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The provider had created a new ‘Expert by Experience’ role for people who wanted to advocate for others and suggest improvements to the service. One had been appointed and had been involved in reviewing and providing feedback about a recent resident’s survey. They had also reviewed company policies and procedures and had attended an open day for a new service. There were plans to appoint 2 more Experts by Experience, who had personal experience of mental health services. People were instrumental in moving the service forward and the provider recognised the value of their input. A support worker undertook group and one to one activities with people. They outlined the support offered to people to enable them to access the community and attend events. There were no restrictions on people leaving or visitors coming into the service; people were seen coming and going throughout both days spent on site in people’s homes.

Staff knew people well and recognised the value of person-centred care. This meant people’s support was individual and personalised to their needs and preferences. Staff supported people to engage in a range of activities including holidays, paid and voluntary work, socialising, and accessing community activities.

Feedback we received from partners was positive. A care co-ordinator had praised staff at one service for making someone admitted into a crisis placement feel safe and settled. A commissioner stated staff went ‘the extra mile’ for people.

People had person centred plans which were reviewed monthly. These were practical as well as aspirational. Four core plans made up a person-centred main care plan and provided information about people, stated what was important to them as well as what they wanted to achieve

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.