Edwin Therapeutic Unit

Young people were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, but a restriction on one young person's privacy had not been reviewed to ensure it was the least restrictive, since it had been put into practice. In addition, this young person's risk assessment for them to receive regular timed checks contradicted the staff practice of constant supervision during the day and night. Reviewing this young person's restrictions monthly was also a condition of their Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Quality monitoring systems were not always effective and lacked the robustness to identify shortfalls and drive continuous improvement in the service.

Since our last inspection a new registered manager had been appointed who had changed the culture of the service from poor to positive. As a result, there was effective communication, staff felt valued and supported and young people received better outcomes.

The provider had acted on two recommendations made at the last inspection. This was to consult with young people in the redecoration of their home; and to follow national guidance in promoting health eating for young people.

Young people were listened to and encourage to raise any concerns or complaints.

There had been improvements in the management of medicines so young people could be confident they received the right medicines at the right time. Medicines were stored, recorded and administered by staff who had been assessed as having the necessary skills.

We were assured the provider was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed. The registered manager took an active role and had oversight of infection control prevention.

Staff training plans were designed around young people's care and support needs. Staff supervision and support was consistent and included reflective practice. Staff told us they felt well supported.

Staff were checked that they were suitable to work with young people before they started to support people.