Baskind Health

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 treated patients with compassion, empathy and kindness and respected their privacy and dignity. Patients told us the provider was respectful and spoke highly about the care they received.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences in the service. They consistently used kindness and empathic to describe staff. They also used phrases such as “nothing short of wonderful”, “exceptional, compassionate and knowledgeable” and “I couldn’t speak any higher of [the provider].”

Staff ensured patient’s privacy and dignity. There was a two-step authentication process in place to keep records confidential.

Partners had no specific feedback on this area.

The provider showed genuine empathy, listened to patients and families, and took account of, recorded, and responded to their needs during the review sessions the assessment team observed.

Patients were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences in the service. They consistently spoke of being treated as an individual and feeling “heard” and that care and treatment was very personalised. They gave lots of examples of how staff had adapted care and service delivery, such as being able to have online assessments when patients felt unable to travel to the clinic, giving lots of breaks during sessions if necessary, and ensuring communication was supportive of patients with ADHD. One person said ““Each appointment and subsequent report feels personalised to me rather than just the diagnosis.”

Staff had completed equality and diversity training, and the provider was able to give examples of how they had supported communication needs of patients.

The assessment team observed individualised care being delivered. There were no concerns that cultural, social and religious needs were not met.

Care records showed that patients’ individual needs and preferences were understood and these were reflected in their care, treatment and support.

Patients felt supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. They often said they were an equal partner in discussions and decision making.

The provider discussed different medication options with patients. They had a collaborative approach to discussing and agreeing which medication was right for the individual.

The provider promoted independent choice and control during reviews. We observed patients being asked their views and wishes regarding care and treatment.

Patients were encouraged to contribute their views during reviews, and this was recorded in care records.

Patients said that staff were alert to their needs and took time to observe, communicate and engage them in discussions about their immediate needs, for example if they were feeling anxious during a session. Patients particularly valued the support offered between sessions, especially when changing medication or doses. Several patients commented positively about the promptness of response.

The provider could clearly describe their availability to patients and signposted patients to relevant service, including out of hours services.

We observed staff listening to and understand patients’ needs, views and wishes during review sessions.

The service did not offer crisis support. However, there were processes in place to signpost patients to other services if they needed urgent assistance. For example, letters and emails included details for out of hours services and helplines.

This was a small service with only two members of staff and a remote medical secretary. The provider self-managed their workload and ensured they had time to meet with fellow ADHD clinicians. Their appraisal, supervision, training, and competencies were all managed by the Independent Doctors Federation.

There were lone worker policies and procedures in place to ensure the safety of staff. The provider met with the nurse regularly and the nurse confirmed that she felt well supported. However, these were not always recorded as formal supervision.