London Autism Clinic

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

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as outstanding.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

This service scored 90 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity.

All carers told us the staff consistently treated them with kindness, compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

All carers were very positive when talking about the staff and the service they had received. They told us they felt listened to and involved in their child’s assessment. All carers said the staff had been kind and warm when interacting with the children.

Carers commented positively on the flexibility of the appointments where needed, for example, offering morning or weekend appointments.

The service collected feedback from patients and carers through paper forms, online forms and Trustpilot reviews. The feedback the service had collected was very positive. Their online Trustpilot had received 112 reviews, with 110 of these reviews rated 5 out of 5.

The service used feedback from patients to continually improve the service and experience for patients. For example, some patients had requested clearer instructions on how to access their 1 Kingdom Street location, and so the service created more detailed instructions. They were also in the process of recording a walkthrough of the rooms, to help reduce the child’s anxiety when going to a new environment

The service received some feedback that their self-funding patients could sometimes feel isolated after receiving a diagnosis for their child. The service now called carers 4 to 6 weeks after a diagnosis to see how they are managing and answering any questions they may have since having time to reflect. Staff would signpost the carer to additional support where needed. Feedback from this additional step has been positive. Patients on the NHS pathway received further support from their local NHS services once the assessment was completed.

The service treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure the recommendations following assessments met the patient’s needs and preferences. Clinicians made individual recommendations based on the child’s presentation, for example, support with sleep or a recommendation to see an occupational therapist. Carers consented to the recommendations made by the service in the feedback meeting, before the report was finalised. The service provided recommendations and support on a range of areas, for example, carers told us the service also provided support and signposting for advice around their benefits entitlement and housing support.

The service supported patients with additional or specific needs, and staff were able to adapt their assessment technique to support the needs of the child. For example, using more toys in an assessment or having the parents as additional support for the child during observations where needed.

All carers told us staff understood and supported their child’s individual needs. Carers told us staff spoke with their children in a child-friendly way, ensuring they felt comfortable. We saw an example of staff’s kind manner when observing part of a child’s assessment.

One carer told us the staff respected their child’s personal needs during an assessment. They gave time for the carer to change their child’s nappy and did not make them feel rushed.

The service provided information in formats suitable for patient’s needs. The service had worked with patients and families to create child friendly leaflets, which included pictures and easy read text. The service was in the process of redeveloping their website to make it more inclusive and accessible. These changes included making it more user friendly and child friendly, by including pictures and videos of staff and the clinic rooms to help children be as prepared as possible for their appointments.

Managers had made links with interpreting services to support patients who required this service. Staff within the service spoke more than 22 different languages. If possible, patients were allocated to staff who spoke their first language.

The service was exceptional at promoting people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The service ensured people had control over their treatment at the service. Prior to a patient committing to the full assessment, self-funding patients had an initial call with a doctor from the service to ensure this assessment would be beneficial for them. One carer told us they were encouraged to continue with their NHS referral due to the time they had already waited, however the carer decided to pay privately through this clinic. Other carers also told us they appreciated the openness and honesty of the service in these initial pre-assessment meetings. The service kept up to date information on their pre-assessments and confirmed 75.6% of patients went on to have the full assessment.

All carers told us staff listened to their concerns and they made decisions together. They told us the assessment process was fully explained and any questions on the processes were answered directly and in full.

Once the assessment was complete, the outcomes and recommendations were discussed with the patient and carers. Carers told us they were able to ask questions on these outcomes and were then asked for consent to share the individual recommendations with the referring NHS trust.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

This service provided an assessment for their patients; all other support and treatment was provided by their local services.

This service was not a crisis service. All referrals were screened to ensure the patient was appropriate for a community assessment.

If a patient was not suitable for the service following their pre-assessment or initial referral screening, the patient was provided with information on where best to get support. For NHS referrals, the service would share their recommendations with the referring trust, as well as the carer.

Carers told us staff were responsive to their requests. We heard examples of clinicians providing letters and speaking with external services on behalf of the families. They also told us clinicians were available to discuss the final report and make amendments when needed in a timely manner. Carers told us the administrative team were kind, helpful and quick to respond to their queries.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they felt respected and supported by their colleagues and managers. Staff spoke positively about working at the service and they were proud of the work of their team.

The service carried out surveys for their staff team to collect feedback on the service. Fifteen staff responded to the most recent survey. The survey asked a range of questions on topics such as, the quality of working conditions, their development opportunities and the recognition they receive. The majority of responses rated these questions as ‘excellent’.

The service had regular events to come together to discuss complex cases, as well as social events away from the office to support team bonding.

Staff told us the service supported their professional development. For example, some administrative staff had been given additional roles linked to their expertise and interests, to support the service.