St Rocco's Hospice

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

The service had a clear vision and inclusive culture, with leaders who were visible, compassionate, and committed to improvement. Staff understood the values and worked to deliver high-quality care. Partnerships were strong, with collaboration across healthcare and community organisations, including tailored support for diverse populations. Innovation was a standout, with unique services like paracentesis, ketamine therapy, and harp therapy enhancing patient experience. However, there were shortfalls in governance and freedom to speak up. Some staff felt unheard, and policies weren’t always aligned with national guidance. Improvements were underway, including appointing a speak-up guardian and strengthening oversight.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The service had a vision and values, and we observed posters of these on display around the service. The service had a strategy in draft.

Staff could explain how they were working to deliver high quality care.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The staff survey from 2023 showed some areas that required improvement, and actions were put in place. We saw examples of these actions both on-site and as part of our assessment. Leaders had conducted a pulse survey in 2024 to monitor progress in 2 key areas which both showed improvement from the 2023 survey.

The leadership team at the Hospice planned to have a further staff survey this year (2025) after a pulse survey last year.

Leaders were visible in the service and approachable for patients and staff.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. People did not always feel they could speak up and that their voice would be heard.

Staff feedback around speaking up was mixed, as some staff did not feel supported to raise concerns or that their concerns were acted on. The 2023 staff survey had shown that only 42% of staff felt their views were listened to. Leaders told us that addressing this issue was a priority. This survey was repeated in April 2025 and showed that this had increased to 54%.

In response to the survey results the service at the time of the inspection was setting up a formal freedom to speak up process with a policy in draft and had just appointed a freedom to speak up guardian, champion and trustee.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did have clear responsibilities, roles, and systems of accountability. However, they did not always have good governance and oversight of the service.

The service had a system to ensure staff stayed up to date with policies and procedures and best practice guidance. The service had a business continuity plan for emergencies.

There was a clear framework of what must be discussed at a ward, team or directorate level in team meetings to ensure that essential information, such as learning from incidents and complaints, was shared and discussed.

Leaders had access to information to support them with their management role. This included information on the performance of the service, staffing and patient care. Leaders could explain what the services top risks were and what was being done to mitigate these.

However, policies were not always in line with evidence based and national guidelines and leaders did not monitor the cleanliness of the environment effectively.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

The hospice planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of local people, and the communities it served. Managers could explain how they tailored services to specific populations depending on the demographics of those areas. Managers worked closely with a local mosque to support those using the hospice of a Muslim faith and they could give examples of times this work had led to better patient centred care.

Leaders were engaged with the local NHS hospital, General Practitioners (GP’s), the Integrated Care Board (ICB) and stakeholders to work collectively to drive improvements.

The hospice worked closely with the local universities supporting medical and nursing students and had a training facility for trainees.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service had a strong focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They always encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome, and quality of life for people.

The hospice ran a paracentesis service to help people who had fluid building up in their stomach area because of illness. This service meant that patients with ascites did not have to wait as long for the procedure through the hospital. Patients said the treatment helped them with their symptoms, so they felt better physically and mentally. It also helped to reduce the pressure on the local hospital services.

The service also provided ketamine therapy as part of its specialist palliative care service to support patients experiencing complex pain and regularly supported patients from other services in the region so they could benefit from this specialist treatment.

During the inspection we observed harp therapy where a harp therapist came to the hospice to play to patients, their loved ones and various hospice groups such as yoga and relaxation. This service was unique to St Rocco’s Hospice and received positive feedback. A loved one of a patient said that it had been “magical” watching their family member be serenaded with her favourite song and it had been uplifting for them all during a difficult time.