Slough Treatment Advice and Recovery Service

Updated 10 August 2022

The Slough Treatment Advice and Recovery Service provides advice, support and treatment for people with drug or alcohol problems in the Borough of Slough. The service is commissioned by the local authority public health team. Turning Point is the registered provider for the service. The service has been delivered by Turning Point since April 2017.

The service is registered to provide the following regulated activity:

Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

There was a registered manager in place. As of June 2022, the service was supporting 350 clients, 180 of whom were receiving Opioid Substitution Therapy (OST).

The service offered psycho-social interventions through planned appointments, a drop-in service, criminal justice and mental health services. The service also offered peer support groups and a volunteer programme. The service worked in a longstanding partnership with a local GP surgery, or client’s own GP, to deliver the prescribing elements of clients’ treatment. The service accepted referrals from individuals requiring support or any other agency, online, via telephone or face-to-face. The service had referral pathways established with the probation service, the community mental health team and local housing services.

We last inspected the Slough Treatment Advice and Recovery Service in March 2019, when the service was rated Good.

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services which have had a recent Direct Monitoring Approach (DMA) assessment where no further action was needed to seek assurance about this decision and to identify learning about the DMA process.

What people who use the service say

Clients we spoke with praised the staff and the support they provided. They described feeling welcomed, and understood by staff, for example, in times of relapse. They said they had maintained a connection with staff whilst Covid restrictions had prevented them coming to the building, and that they were glad to see people face to face again.

Updated 10 August 2022

The Slough Treatment Advice and Recovery Service provides advice, support and treatment for people with drug or alcohol problems in the Borough of Slough

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

• The service provided safe care. The premises where clients were seen were safe and clean. The number of clients on the caseload of the teams, and of individual members of staff, was not too high to prevent staff from giving each client the time they needed. Staff told us that caseloads rarely exceeded 40 clients, but that the level of complexity and need within a caseload could result in an adjustment.
• Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding. Of the 10 risk management plans we saw, all were comprehensive with clear actions to manage identified risks that were regularly reviewed. Information needed to ensure children were safeguarded was clearly documented and accessible to relevant staff, and it was evident that staff exchanged information with other services, including children’s social care, as required.
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the clients and in line with national guidance about best practice. This included key-work, group work, open access sessions and harm reduction work including the provision of safer injecting equipment. Staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided. We noted improvements to care from these processes, including a review of referral processes for detox and residential rehabilitation services.
• The teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of clients under their care. The team included a qualified nurse who held lead responsibility for Blood Borne Virus (BBV) screening, and other health promotion interventions. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal, including clinical supervision. Staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team and relevant services outside the organisation.
• The provider had a well-developed partnership agreement in place with a local GP surgery who delivered the specialist prescribing element of the overall treatment system. The agreement underpinned the close joint work between the provider and the GP surgery, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and a robust governance structure, and was regularly reviewed by both parties. Working to this agreement enabled staff from both agencies to share knowledge, skills and expertise, and enabled clients of the service to experience seamless support despite the psychosocial and pharmacological aspects of their treatment being delivered by different providers.
• Staff treated clients with compassion and kindness and understood the individual needs of clients. They actively involved clients in decisions and care planning.
• The service was easy to access. Staff planned and managed discharge well and had alternative pathways for people whose needs it could not meet.
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that its procedures ran smoothly.

Updated 10 August 2022

• The service provided safe care. The premises where clients were seen were safe and clean. The number of clients on the caseload of the teams, and of individual members of staff, was not too high to prevent staff from giving each client the time they needed. Staff told us that caseloads rarely exceeded 40 clients, but that the level of complexity and need within a caseload could result in an adjustment.
• Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding. Of the 10 risk management plans we saw, all were comprehensive with clear actions to manage identified risks that were regularly reviewed. Information needed to ensure children were safeguarded was clearly documented and accessible to relevant staff, and it was evident that staff exchanged information with other services, including children’s social care, as required.
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the clients and in line with national guidance about best practice. This included key-work, group work, open access sessions and harm reduction work including the provision of safer injecting equipment. Staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided. We noted improvements to care from these processes, including a review of referral processes for detox and residential rehabilitation services.
• The teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of clients under their care. The team included a qualified nurse who held lead responsibility for Blood Borne Virus (BBV) screening, and other health promotion interventions. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal, including clinical supervision. Staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team and relevant services outside the organisation.
• The provider had a well-developed partnership agreement in place with a local GP surgery who delivered the specialist prescribing element of the overall treatment system. The agreement underpinned the close joint work between the provider and the GP surgery, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and a robust governance structure, and was regularly reviewed by both parties. Working to this agreement enabled staff from both agencies to share knowledge, skills and expertise, and enabled clients of the service to experience seamless support despite the psychosocial and pharmacological aspects of their treatment being delivered by different providers.
• Staff treated clients with compassion and kindness and understood the individual needs of clients. They actively involved clients in decisions and care planning.
• The service was easy to access. Staff planned and managed discharge well and had alternative pathways for people whose needs it could not meet.
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that its procedures ran smoothly.