South Tyneside Adult Recovery Service

Updated 14 September 2022

South Tyneside Adult Recovery Service provides community substance misuse support for adults in South Tyneside. Their services include substitute medication and support with detoxification from alcohol and/or drugs in the community, support to reduce the harm of drugs and/or alcohol and achieve a balanced approach to life. The service also provides support to families, group therapy sessions, health and wellbeing checks and vaccinations. South Tyneside Adult Recovery Service also supports clients going through the criminal justice system. The service operates from Cookson house in South Tyneside.

The local council had commissioned an integrated substance misuse service, combining services between two organisations. A non-profit organisation held the contract for care coordination within South Tyneside Adult Recovery service and provided psychosocial interventions. The clinical elements of the service had been subcontracted to Spectrum Community Health Community Interest Company (Spectrum). South Tyneside Adult recovery service was the overall name for the partnership between the two organisations.

This inspection was carried out on the clinical elements of the service, provided by Spectrum. The rating applied is specifically for the clinical care they provide for South Tyneside Adult Recovery Service.

Spectrum at South Tyneside Adult Recovery Service has been registered with the Care Quality Commission since 23 March 2020 to carry out the regulated activities as follows:

• diagnostic and screening procedures and
• treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

There was a registered manager for this service. This was the first inspection of this service.

Updated 14 September 2022

We rated this location as good because:

• The service provided safe care. Clinical premises where clients were seen were safe, clean, well maintained and well located for the client base. There were no waiting lists within the service, so clients were seen promptly. Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
• Staff were highly motivated, client-focussed, skilled, experienced and up to date with their mandatory training requirements. Staff received appraisals, supervision and a comprehensive induction programme. Morale was good, and staff supported and worked well with each other. There were many examples of mutual support and teamwork.
• Staff developed holistic, innovative and recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment and in collaboration with families and carers. They provided a range of treatments that were informed by best-practice guidance and suitable to the individual needs of the clients. For example, harm reduction, community detoxification and substitute prescribing. Clients were offered hepatitis B and C testing on site.
• The teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of the clients. Staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team and with relevant services outside the organisation with which they had developed strong working relationships.
• Staff treated clients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood their individual needs. Clients we spoke with were very positive about the service, where they said they were well treated and felt safe. They actively involved clients and families and carers in care decisions and were aware of their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that its procedures ran smoothly. Managers and staff worked well with commissioners and had robust alternative care pathways and referral systems to other services within the area to further develop good quality care and integration of services.

However:

• At the time of our inspection basic life support training for two out of four eligible staff had expired although they were booked on a course in the following weeks. At all times during this lapsed period at least one of compliant staff member was on shift.
• The Interim Speak Up Policy and Managing Safeguarding Allegations against staff Policy both had review dates which had expired at the time of our inspection.
• All incidents were reported on the lead providers system and classified as theirs, therefore it was unclear for audit purposes how senior Spectrum management had clear oversight over all medication and prescribing or connected incidents for the service without manually being alerted by management at the service. One Spectrum incident we reviewed had further follow up work completed however, this was not documented in the incident record and there was no paper trail available as evidence.
• Learning from incidents was not a standard monthly agenda item for discussion on team meeting minutes.

Updated 14 September 2022