Rapid Response Secure Care

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Staff were friendly, caring, and approachable. They were focused on understanding the needs of the people they were supporting. Processes supported staff to understand people using the service. Staff felt valued and were supported in the workplace.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients. Therefore, we were unable to directly capture the experiences of people being cared for. However, partners we contacted did not have any negative feedback about Rapid Response Secure Care. We received positive feedback from partners. Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHP) told us they saw staff interacting with patients in a friendly, caring, and approachable way.

Staff understood the importance in taking time to build positive relationships with people. Staff said they would talk calmly with patients to reassure them. Staff were focused on reducing risks and caring for patients, they were not rushed to complete conveyances. A member of staff said they “loved to help people change their lives in difficult circumstances”.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients. Therefore, we were unable to directly capture the experiences of people being cared for. However, partners we contacted did not have any negative feedback about Rapid Response Secure Care. We received positive feedback from partners. An AMHP told us they had seen staff spend hours talking to a patient before conveying which enabled them to understand their needs and avoid the use of restraint. They said when the patient was being transported, staff were in constant communication with the patient and responded to their needs.

Staff said they treated each person as an individual, which enabled them to perform their jobs safely. They said sometimes it was hard to have detailed knowledge of a patient before they attended, but they always engaged with people to understand them as individuals.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients.

The booking process enabled information to be collected about a person’s cultural, social and religious needs. These were not always completed as when some bookings were taken to transport people the commissioners of the service had limited information. Each vehicle had communication tools to aid staff to engage with people.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients. Therefore, we were unable to directly capture the experiences of people being cared for. However, partners we contacted did not have any negative feedback about Rapid Response Secure Care. We received positive feedback from partners. An Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) told us staff gathered information to understand a patient and took appropriate decisions to support them.

Staff enabled a family member or friend to accompany patients to help de-escalate situations and reduce risks of conveying a patient. Where patients were detained under the Mental Health Act, staff said they would keep them informed of their rights to appeal detention.

The service had policies and processes to reduce the use of restraint which promoted patients’ independence.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care or speak with patients. Therefore, we were unable to directly capture the experiences of people being cared for. However, partners we contacted did not have any negative feedback about Rapid Response Secure care.

Staff understood the importance of arranging comfort breaks. They said these were planned into journeys, if a need arose urgently they would arrange to stop at a safe place. Vehicles had communication tools to help staff understand patient needs.

During the assessment we were unable to observe patient care. Therefore, we were unable to directly capture the experiences of people being cared for. However, partners we contacted did not have any negative feedback about Rapid Response Secure care.

Staff felt valued and supported by leaders. They were proud to work for the service. They felt workloads were manageable and they were not put under time pressure to complete conveyances. Staff felt comfortable to raise issues with the management team and said team meetings enabled them to talk freely.

Leaders had an open-door policy and encouraged staff to speak up to raise concerns. Leaders had created external third party support for staff should they wish to raise concerns relating to leaders. There were policies to support staff.