We found there were effective processes in place to ensure people’s consent to treatment and capacity to make decisions had been adequately managed.

We talked with eight patients on the assessment and rehabilitation wards. They told us they were happy at the service, happy with the care they received, liked the staff who looked after them, and that the unit was kept clean and tidy. Some comments captured included, “Everything is how it should be,” “I’m happy being here,” “The meals are alright here,” “The staff are helpful and play games with you,” “Education is good here …I’m learning maths” and “It’s cool here.”

We found staff were adequately supported because they received regular training sessions, supervision and an annual appraisal.

We found there were effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that patients receive.

We found there was a complaints process in place.

It was not possible to gain the direct views of people who use the service on this occasion as the assessment was conducted remotely. However a range of information was obtained that demonstrated how the provider ensures people who use services are involved in decisions about services and how their views are obtained. Submissions from the Sheffield LiNK (local involvement network) demonstrated how the provider has worked with and involved LiNK participants in influencing the city wide strategy for improving mental health services in Sheffield. For example, the LiNK participants work on recovery wards had been fed back to managers and staff, leading to changes in care in respect of service users' sexuality, spirituality and problems with social interaction. The LiNK has been involved in the quality reporting process with the provider and stated “we are pleased with how we have been engaged in this and we will possibly be doing some joint enter and view visits.” The provider included some views of people who use services who had fed back comments as part of its last complainants survey, for example, one comment stated, “I like the face to face contact. I felt they understood our concerns and did their best to address them”.

The team governance report obtained for Forest Lodge explained a large range of ways people who use services are involved and views obtained, for example, a ‘diversity and cultural group’ and ‘service user involvement group’ had been used to gain opinions so issues raised would be addressed. A range of social inclusion, vocational rehabilitation and recovery activity development was maintained at Forest Lodge. For example, a number of patients had been attracted to joining the ‘allotment group’, which had allowed people who use services to make good links with those under the care of the Sheffield Outreach team (SORT).