We rated Humphrey House as good because:

• The service was providing person-centred, recovery focused care to clients.
• Staff completed comprehensive assessments on clients. Client records contained individualised and up to date treatment plans. Clients were offered choices in respect of their treatment and their views were recorded in records.
• Clients gave very positive feedback about the service they received and praised the support staff gave them.
• The service offered good support and guidance to carers.
• The service provision was adapted and reviewed to meet the needs of clients.
• Managers could implement changes and innovation to improve the service and what could be offered to clients. Managers felt empowered by the organisation to identify, trial and develop new ways of working to improve the service offer to clients.
• Staff reported positive working relationships as a team and with managers. Staff felt supported by managers.

We do not currently rate independent standalone substance misuse services.

We found this service was providing recovery focused, person centred care to clients.

The service was well arranged over two floors of the building, with separate entrances for the treatment service and the needle exchange. All areas within the building were clean and tidy. The service was safely staffed, with low levels of sickness and a low turnover rate.

Staff completed assessments which included all substance use, substance use history, accommodation and employment, physical health, mental health and risks. Assessments allowed for discussions around harm minimisation and health promotion, including blood borne virus screening, alcohol use assessment and smoking cessation advice. All records contained up to date, personalised, recovery orientated treatment plans. There was effective multidisciplinary working within the service and innovative intra-agency working with statutory and voluntary organisations.

Clients described being treated with dignity and respect and staff being friendly and welcoming, with praise for volunteers too. We saw positive feedback from clients at interview, from comment cards and from reviewing service feedback. In treatment groups, we observed a client centred approach with good engagement between facilitators and clients. We saw active involvement in treatment planning evident in client records. There was excellent carer support including a designated carer champion employed by the service.

The service offered appointments for assessments by phone or on a drop in basis. We saw that staff worked flexibly in making arrangements that worked for clients and carers. Service provision was continually reviewed and adapted to meet the changing needs of the local population and the clients who used the service.

The service had a well understood vision and values. This service had a good governance structure. The manager ensured staff were aware of provider level changes and developments. Staff described a positive working culture with good team working and mutual support.