Archived: The Hayes

We rated The Hayes as good because:

• The service provided safe care. Clinical premises where children and young people were seen were safe and clean. There were no waiting lists ensuring that young people were seen promptly. Staff understood how to protect children and young people from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. All information needed to deliver patient care was available to all relevant staff when they needed it and in an accessible form.
• Staff developed care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the children and young people and staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided.
• Staff considered risk within their appointments and care notes but did not always complete the risk assessment document to evidence that risk had been considered, for example by documenting there was no risk.
• The teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of the children and young people. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal. Staff worked well together as a multi-disciplinary team and with relevant services outside the organisation.
• Staff treated children and young people with compassion and kindness and understood the individual needs of children and young people. They actively involved children and young people and families and carers in care decisions.
• The teams met the needs of all young people who use the service – including those with a protected characteristic. Staff helped children and young people with communication, advocacy and cultural support.
• The service had clear criteria for which children and young people would be offered a service. The service had a range of rooms and equipment to support treatment and care. Staff treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that procedures relating to the work of the service ran smoothly.

However:

• Whilst notes were accessible staff did not always follow best practice when completing their care note; notes were not always continuous with page numbers, dated and signed. There was no index and therefore records were not always easy to navigate.
• Not all staff could explain the principles of Gillick competence as they applied to people under the age of 16 and we did not find evidence that Gillick competence had been assessed in one record. Gillick competency is where a person (under 16 years of age) is assessed and deemed to have the competence to make decision about their own care, without the need for parental consent.
• We found four responses to complaints to be defensive in their tone and content.