Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Cygnet Newbus Grange, Neasham, Darlington.

Cygnet Newbus Grange in Neasham, Darlington is a Hospitals - Mental health/capacity specialising in the provision of services relating to assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the 1983 act, caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs, caring for people whose rights are restricted under the mental health act, learning disabilities, mental health conditions and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 9th December 2019

Cygnet Newbus Grange is managed by Cygnet (OE) Limited who are also responsible for 20 other locations

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 2019-12-09
    Last Published 2019-02-18

Local Authority:

    Darlington

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.

18th May 2017 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

We carried out a focused, unannounced inspection of Newbus Grange, in response to receiving information of concern. These concerns related to two allegations of abusive behaviour by staff towards patients.

We reviewed the caring domain, and the skills of staff to deliver effective care. The hospital operated a zero tolerance policy to abuse of any form, including shouting or using language not in line with the values or policies of the organisation. We were satisfied that the provider was taking action to deal with any instances of this type of behaviour. Staff told us they had confidence in the management and felt able to raise concerns about any inappropriate behaviour.

At this inspection we found that:

  • There was a multi-disciplinary team working within the hospital to meet the needs of patients.
  • There was an effective induction process in place for new staff and compliance with mandatory training was high overall. Staff had completed a range of additional training relevant to their role and the needs of patients.
  • Staff assessed the communication needs of patients and demonstrated a good understanding of these. Staff used a range of communication aids to ensure patients could understand and be involved in decisions about their care.
  • Staff interactions with patients were respectful, encouraging and supportive.
  • Staff had regular appraisals and supervision in line with hospital policy. Managers dealt with performance issues and concerns quickly and in line with the hospital disciplinary policy.
  • Patients and family members told us they liked the hospital and the staff. Overall, patients and family members felt involved in making decisions and were invited to attend meetings to discuss treatment and care.
  • Staff supported patients to make choices, for example deciding which activities to take part in. This was informed by the likes and dislikes of the patient, which was documented within care plans.
  • Staff responded appropriately to challenging behaviour, treating patients with respect and maintaining their dignity.

However;

One carer felt that communication could be improved. This information was shared with the hospital manager.

20th October 2016 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

We rated Newbus Grange as good because:

  • Following our last inspection in January 2016, the provider was required to make improvements in relation to two regulatory breaches. The breaches related to concerns about authorisations relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and implementation of the Mental Health Act code of practice. The report about this inspection was published in June 2016. We carried out a focused inspection within six months of the published report and found the provider had made improvements to the service. We have re-rated the effective domain from requires improvement to good.
  • The provider had undertaken actions to ensure changes in the revised Mental Health Act code of practice were implemented. We were provided with a plan which showed a review of systems, processes and policies identified within the code of practice which required amending. Training for staff reflected changes in the Mental Health Act code of practice. Annual ‘quality development reviews’ included monitoring of person centred care planning and positive behaviour support.
  • Staff received training in relation to autism and learning disabilities.
  • The provider had a system in place to ensure policies were kept up to date. We saw evidence of this and how the provider ensured staff were made aware of new or updated policies. An up to date Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards policy which complied with the Mental Health Act code of practice was in place.

However:

  • The provider did not document decision making for whether patients met the requirements of the Mental Health Act or the Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
  • Some staff could not demonstrate a good understanding of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
  • The provider had not fully completed updating its policies in line with the Mental Health Act code of practice 2015.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We rated Newbus Grange as outstanding because:

  • Feedback for the service and the staff working there was positive. Carers and family members, told us that staff went the extra mile to support the patients in the hospital. Staff were highly motivated to care for patients in a kind and dignified way. Staff recognised the value of patients’ relationships and supported patients to maintain relationships with those who were close to them. Staff in the service recognised the totality of patients’ needs and showed determination and creativity in overcoming obstacles to delivering care.
  • Staff supported patients in having access to advocacy and their support network. Staff in the service were aware of patients’ communication needs and ensured that people who needed to know understood these. Staff had received training in Makaton and voice output communication aids to support patients and also used pictures and simple sentences to communicate with patients.
  • There was compassionate, inclusive and effective leadership at all levels. Leaders understood the issues, priorities and challenges of their service and beyond. There was a systematic and integrated approach to monitoring, reviewing and providing evidence of progress against the provider’s strategy and plans. Plans were consistently implemented and had a positive impact on quality and sustainability of the service.
  • Leaders had an inspiring and shared purpose and strived to deliver and motivate staff to succeed. Staff were proud to work for the organisation and spoke highly of the culture. Staff at all levels were actively encouraged to speak up and raise concerns, and policies and procedures positively supported this. There was strong collaboration, team working and support and a strong focus on improving the quality of care and sustainability of the service and of improving patient’s experiences.
  • There was a demonstrated commitment to best practice performance and risk management systems and processes. The organisation reviewed how they functioned and ensured that staff at all levels had the skills and knowledge to use those systems and processes effectively. Problems were identified and addressed quickly and openly.
  • There were consistently high levels of constructive engagement with staff and people who used services. Rigorous and constructive challenge from people who used services, the public and stakeholders was welcomed and seen as a vital way of holding services to account. There was a demonstrated commitment to acting on feedback.
  • Staffing levels were appropriate to the needs of the patients. There were effective handovers at every shift change and staff were aware of any changes to patients’ needs. Risks to patients were monitored and risk management plans were updated when patients’ needs changed or following incidents. Staff followed best practice in relation to prescribing and medicines management, including storage, transportation and disposal.
  • Patients’ care and treatment was delivered in line with national guidance. Staff carried out a comprehensive assessment of patients’ needs when they were admitted to the hospital. Staff understood patients’ rights and protected them. Patients who were detained under the Mental Health Act were advised of their rights regularly and staff did this in a way they could understand. Patients were supported to make decisions about their care and where patients lacked capacity there was evidence of decisions being made in their best interests.
  • Staff routinely collected and monitored information about patients’ treatment and outcomes and used it to improve care. Staff participated in accreditation schemes to ensure patients received the best care and treatment possible. All staff participated in the provider’s mandatory training schedule. Staff, including agency staff, were supported in their roles with regular supervisions and appraisal. Care and treatment was supported through close and effective team working, including with outside agencies. Staff were consistent and proactive in supporting patients to lead healthier lives.
  • Patients’ needs and preferences were taken into account to ensure that care was provided in an appropriate way.

However:

  • There was a group of patients in the unit who had been there for many years. However, we concluded that the principal reason that these people were still in hospital was because of difficulty in finding alternative placements and that this was not under the direct control of the provider. The current average length of stay is four years, which is below the current NHS length of stay. The provider worked actively with commissioners to facilitate discharge.

 

 

Latest Additions: