Chaucer Hospital

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. We assessed all quality statements.

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

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.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Caring.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff put patients at the centre of their care. They took time to interact with patients and those close to them in a respectful and considerate way. We observed a patient journey from the ward to theatre and recovery. We saw staff speak to the patient with kindness and compassion and the theatre team kept the patient fully informed at every stage.

The hospital had an up-to-date Privacy and Dignity Policy and 7 dignity champions across different roles and grades. They were led by the National Dignity Council and formed part of a nationwide network to put dignity and respect at the heart of patient care and support a positive experience.

Staff gave examples of how they protected patients’ privacy and dignity. They gave patients plenty of time to change into theatre gowns, asked their preference for having their door open, but closed doors when providing care and holding confidential and/or clinical discussions. We saw staff knocked on patient doors and waited for permission to enter their room. They wore name badges, introduced themselves to patients and asked how they would like to be addressed.

Staff minimised movement and noise in the anaesthetic room and closed the door to avoid disturbance. The team maintained a calm and friendly atmosphere to help reduce anxiety and ensured the patient was covered as much as possible during the procedure.

Staff could raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients, without fear of the consequences. They maintained confidentiality during clinical conversations and patient information.

The hospital received between 95% and 100% positive comments on the Friends and Family Test for July 2024 to June 2025. Feedback included, “Everybody was very kind and professional, and always there to help.” “All the staff were friendly, respectful and professional throughout my visit, and I was treated very well.’’

The evidence showed an exceptional standard. 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 took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service collected feedback about people’s experience through the hospital survey, comment cards and social media. Patients received comment cards after each admission, and the responses were reviewed at monthly clinical committee meetings and actions were agreed in response to feedback and to drive improvements for the service.
The service provided patient information in different formats. For example, easy-read, large text and braille. Staff had access to an interpreting and translation service, and leaflets were available in different languages.

Staff supported patients to have choice and control over their own care. They helped them to make decisions about their treatment, wellbeing and food choices. The service provided patients with a choice of food to meet their dietary requirements. They were inclusive of people from ethnic minority groups, with religious beliefs and food allergies and intolerances.

Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. We read feedback from the parents of an adult living with a learning disability who praised the staff for supporting their individual needs. Staff had arranged for the patient to meet the teams in advance of admission, they involved their parents in planning their care and provided easy-to-read literature about the procedure and what to expect. All staff involved in the care were briefed in advance and the hospital pharmacy counselled them on their pre-operative medicines.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The service had appropriate equipment to support and maximise people’s independence and outcomes from care and treatment. A physiotherapy team supported patients to maintain independence and mobility after surgery.

There was an array of information leaflets to enhance patient knowledge of care and expected experience. For example, the hospital admission booklet which provided a general oversight of expected care and experience. In addition, more general information was available on the hospital website which included information about private healthcare, costs and the need to transfer to the local NHS trust in the event of complications.

The service adjusted for patient’s needs. For example, by ensuring people’s access to premises and by meeting patients’ specific communication needs. Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Staff identified and responded to changing risks to patients. Staff completed intentional rounding for all patients on the surgical ward. The frequency of the rounding reflected the patient’s clinical need and was recorded on specific charts. Intentional rounding in nursing is a structured, proactive method where nurses regularly check on patients (usually hourly), to address specific needs and promote patient comfort and safety. This involved a standardised protocol focusing on the "4 Ps": Positioning, Pain, Personal needs (like toileting), and Placement of personal items. The goal was to anticipate and meet patient needs, improve communication, and prevent potential problems, such as patient falls.

Patients, relatives and carers were signposted to the hospital website for details of the complaints process and how to submit a complaint by email. Information about the complaints process was also detailed in the patient leaflet ‘How did we do today?’ which was easily accessible in all patient areas.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Leaders were visible in the service for patients and staff, and senior managers completed daily rounds and attended safety huddles. The executive director was on-site early so they had an opportunity to speak with night staff to ensure their ideas and concerns were heard. Staff told us there had been changes to the leadership team and the management style was more inclusive. Staff told us they felt supported and there was improved communication in the leadership team.

Leaders ran listening events so staff felt heard and could raise concerns and ideas for improvement. They invested in staff wellbeing, rewarded staff and acknowledged their achievements. There was an established staff recognition and reward programme and opportunities to support staff development. For example, 1 nurse told us their request to become an advanced life supporter was supported.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued and described effective support from nursing colleagues. Some staff described mixed feedback about feeling valued by consultants. However, all staff told us they felt confident to clinically challenge. They escalated any concerns to the senior management team, who they described as supportive and decisive when concerns were escalated.

Staff had access to support for their own physical and emotional health needs through an occupational health service. The hospital was accredited with the Workplace Wellbeing Charter. The accreditation acknowledged their commitment to improving the health and wellbeing of their workforce.

The hospital had a notice board for wellbeing at the front of the hospital which showed what the hospital was doing to promote wellbeing and how they supported staff. There were many resources and initiatives to support staff wellbeing. For example, staff had access to a quiet room and a multi-faith room. They could access counselling, wellbeing support, flexible working, celebration events and more.