Spire Parkway Hospital

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

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

At our last inspection we rated this key question as good. At this inspection, the rating has remained the same.

We have not awarded this service a score for Well-led.

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

There was a shared vision, strategy, and culture. Staff and leaders demonstrated a positive, compassionate, listening culture that promoted trust and understanding between them and children and young people using the service. The culture was focused on learning and improvement and there was a mutual trust and respect between the leadership and staff.

Staff cared about their work and were responsive to the needs of people. The culture was focused on patient safety and care.

Staff were very proud of their work and reported positive working relationships on the ward and theatre environment.

The vision, values and strategy had been developed through a structured planning process. The hospital's vision and values were prominently displayed throughout the hospital and were visible in clinical and non-clinical areas.

The hospital also had an operational plan in place. The plan contained specific objectives for individual departments. For example, theatre services focused on ensuring operating lists started and finished on time, while ward teams monitored and sought to reduce patients' length of stay where appropriate.

Staff at all levels demonstrated an understanding of equality, diversity and human rights and described how they prioritised the delivery of safe, high-quality and compassionate care. During our inspection, no concerns were raised regarding bullying, harassment or discriminatory behaviour within the service.

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.

Staff felt supported by their managers and said that management were regularly present in the departments. There was support available for staff who had been involved in an emotional or difficult situation.

Following a period of high turnover of leaders, staff told us there was now much more stability. At the time of our onsite inspection, staff told us leaders were visible and supportive.

Leaders were knowledgeable about issues and priorities for the quality of the service provided and could access appropriate support and development to their role. Staff told us they had regular reviews with their managers to identify areas where they can develop.

The team worked well together, they valued and respected each other’s contribution. There was a focus on the safety and quality of patient care alongside supporting staff.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The hospital had freedom to speak up champions on site who staff were able to contact. A freedom to speak up guardian is a named person in every hospital who can provide independent support and advice to staff that want to speak up. Staff told us they were aware of the guardians and would access them if required.

There was a good culture of speaking up where staff felt safe to raise concerns without fear of detriment. Concerns were handled sensitively and confidentially and mindful of people’s rights and responsibilities. Staff told us they raised concerns and received positive feedback. They felt these were received in a constructive manner, acknowledged and where possible acted upon.

The service valued diversity in their workforce. Leaders worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Leaders acted to continually review and improve the culture of the organisation in the context of equality, diversity and inclusion. Staff told us they were committed to fostering an inclusive environment that valued diversity and promoted equality for both staff and patients.

Staff generally worked 12-hour shift pattern, but consideration could be given to flexible working as the need arose.

Leaders took steps to remove bias from practices to ensure equality of opportunity. All staff were required to complete equality and diversity and inclusion training tailored to their roles. At the time of our inspection, 100% of staff had completed this training.

The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. Staff used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. Staff act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

There were clear governance, management and accountability arrangements. Staff understood their role and responsibilities. There were local governance meetings that fed into the national and corporate governance meetings. This allowed for corporate oversight and benchmarking with other hospitals in the Spire group.

There was a corporate audit programme with monthly, quarterly, biannual and annual audits scheduled. Results were benchmarked with other hospitals within the Spire group. These were discussed at the weekly Rapid Response meeting, monthly senior management meeting and reported to MAC. Any audits out of range would have action plans and be repeated more frequently.

Leaders acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. Risks which had been reviewed and the score reduced or changed were discussed at the Hospital Safety, Quality and Risk committee.

Each department had risk assessments in place, which were regularly reviewed through the Quality and Risk Committee. The Children and Young People (CYP) service had three risks recorded on its risk register. One identified risk related to the potential variation in the availability of European Paediatric Advanced Life Support (EPALS) trained staff within the recovery area, which could impact the provision of specialist support for paediatric theatre lists. To mitigate this risk, recovery staff had also received EPALS training to provide additional cover when required, and recruitment was underway for an additional CYP nursing post.

All risks had clearly defined control measures and action plans in place, with identified review dates and target completion dates. This enabled the service to monitor progress, mitigate risks effectively, and ensure actions were completed in a timely manner.

Each department had a business continuity plan which included actions to take in the event of disruption to services.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. Staff shared information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

The hospital had several service level agreements (SLA) in place with local trusts and organisations to support the services offered at the hospital. We saw SLA for transfer of patients to local NHS trusts and intensive care units when required.

The service engaged with a local school to give education on the effects of drugs and alcohol, smoking and vaping. The sessions had been delivered by one of the CYP nurses.

They held regular meetings with the local ICB to review performance, quality assurance and the ongoing contracts.

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. Staff encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. Staff actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

The service operational plan included CYP but there were also separate goals, to have a greater analysis of the patient experience through reviews and feedback, to increase support for consultants in planning theatre lists to reduce wait times. They also aimed to increase recruitment to the CYP team to enable wider coverage of nurses throughout hospital and for CYP nurse cover to be able to facilitate one-stop appointments and reduce patient travel needs.

The hospital held a shared learning event monthly and information was presented on a staff information board. All departments were encouraged to be involved. Recent topics included never events, patient transfers to other hospitals and consultants with the same names. Actions and lessons learnt were included.

The CYP team had set departmental projects which included redecoration of day care ward and streamlining of booking CYP phlebotomy appointments. Progress on these were discussed at the quarterly team meeting.