Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Liberty House Clinic Limited, Luton.

Liberty House Clinic Limited in Luton is a Rehabilitation (substance abuse) specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require treatment for substance misuse and substance misuse problems. The last inspection date here was 24th June 2019

Liberty House Clinic Limited is managed by Liberty House Clinic Limited.

Contact Details:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Effective: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Caring: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Responsive: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Well-Led: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Overall: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-06-24
    Last Published 2018-07-16

Local Authority:

    Luton

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

4th January 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • Staff did not have access to personal alarms for staff and client safety. There were no alarms located throughout the building.

  • The service did not have designated bathrooms for males and females. The service had a shower room on the second floor which contained three showers, there was no frosting on the shower doors to maintain client dignity and privacy.

  • Female and male sleeping areas were not segregated. Risk assessments did not include risk of mixed sex accommodation and were not being regularly updated.

  • The blood pressure machine and alcometer ( had not been calibrated. Staff had not received adequate training on taking clients blood pressure.

  • Staff did not record the temperature of the clinic room. Staff did not know if the room temperature was too high.

  • Staff were not reviewing or updating care plans regularly. Staff completed risk assessments as part of the initial assessment but risk assessments were not reviewed or updated regularly or following an incident.

  • The service used several folders for recording different types of incident, including serious incidents, incidents, medication errors and safeguarding. This created confusion for staff as incidents may have fallen in to more than one of the recording categories. Staff were not able to feedback any learning from incidents.

  • Clients had a lack of one-to-one key working and activities outside of therapy. Clients told us the only physical activity they were able to take part in was a walk around the local park with a staff member.

  • Staff were not being supervised regularly in line with the provider’s supervision policy.

  • Historically management did not follow the service recruitment policy. The new management team had developed a system to ensure that staff recruitment followed the provider’s policy.

However, we also found the following areas of good practice:

  • A recently implemented management team had ensured that all staff had completed mandatory training. Staff morale at the service had recently improved and staff felt able to input to service development.

  • We saw policies, procedures and training related to medication and medicines management including prescribing, detoxification, and assessing clients’ tolerance to medication. We observed medication administration which was in line with NICE guidelines.

  • On admission clients had a doctor’s assessment with a member of the clinical team. We saw record of thorough clinical assessments and prescriptions located within client care and treatment files.

  • Prior to discharge all clients completed an exit survey which included plans and coping strategies following discharge, improvements in mental and physical health and feedback on the treatment they received.

  • We observed staff interacting with clients in a kind, considerate and caring manner.Clients we spoke with told us staff were interested in their wellbeing and that staff were respectful, polite and compassionate. Clients felt safe

  • All clients we spoke with were aware of the service complaints procedure. The service held weekly community meetings where clients were encouraged to raise any issues with staff.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found the following areas of good practice:

• Staff had access to radios and mobile phones during 1:1 and group sessions, meaning they could contact other staff for support during an emergency if required. Staff gave clients who were detoxing from substances a radio to contact staff.

• The service had recently been decorated; furnishings were clean and well maintained. All communal areas were clean and in good order. The clinic room was clean and tidy.

• Overall, 100% of staff had completed mandatory training.

• All clients had a risk assessment and a risk management plan.

• Medical assessments completed by the medical team were comprehensive, there was a clear medicines management process in place, all medication was stored appropriately. Physical health checks were completed by the medical team before initiating a treatment and detoxification plan. Staff completing blood pressure checks, breathalysing, and urine drug testing were fully trained.

• The service reported incidents effectively, and learning from incidents was shared through various meetings.

• Care plans were personalised, recovery orientated, holistic and looked at strength areas for each client.

• Clients had access to a range of therapeutic groups and activities to support treatment.

• All staff, including bank staff had received a thorough induction, were regularly supervised and all eligible staff had an appraisal.

• Clients we spoke with told us staff were helpful, caring, approachable and they felt safe using the service.

• Family members received support and learnt how to offer encouragement to their loved one on discharge through attending weekly family groups.

• Clients formulated their own discharge plans which included arrangements for unplanned exit from the service. On occasions where a client would want to disengage from treatment, the service would ensure that the client was able to get home safely and the client’s family would be informed.

• The service held weekly community meetings where clients were encouraged to raise any issues with staff.

• Staff morale at the service was high. Staff told us that they felt valued and rewarded within their roles; staff said they all worked well together as a team.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

• Some clients we spoke with felt they could have been more involved with their care plan.

 

 

Latest Additions: