The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

ACES (Cambridge)

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

39-41, Petty Cury, Cambridge, CB2 3NB 0333 188 2937

Provided and run by:
Anglia Community Eye Service Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about ACES (Cambridge) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about ACES (Cambridge), you can give feedback on this service.

17 and 20 September 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an inspection of ACES (Cambridge) using our comprehensive methodology on 17 and 20 September 2022. This was the first time we inspected the service. We rated it as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well led:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good treatment records. Senior managers collected safety information from multiple locations and used it to improve the service.
  • Managers and executives monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and had access to good information. Staff provided excellent care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers. The service engaged well with patients and received overwhelmingly good feedback.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for their planned procedures
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were very clear about their roles and accountabilities. There was a fully embedded and systematic approach to improvement, which made consistent use of recognised improvement methodology. Improvement was seen as a way to deal with performance and for the organisation to learn.