HCA Healthcare UK The Harborne Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that people and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of people and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that people could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated as good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. People were able to access the care, support and treatment they needed, when they needed it. However, not all staff had the requisite training to respond to the additional needs of some patients.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

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

The service did not ensure all staff have completed training to enable them to recognise and respond to the additional needs of patients. Despite this, staff always made sure patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Patients’ care plans reflected their physical, mental, emotional and social needs. Staff selected which care plans were required for each patient and then regularly reviewed and completed progress notes. We reviewed 7 sets of records and found these reflected patients’ needs.

Patients received the most appropriate care and treatment for them as the service made reasonable adjustments where necessary. Staff told us if they had patients who had additional or complex needs, they would make specific plans to meet the patient's needs. For example, if a patient with dementia was due to be admitted or someone with a learning disability, staff would encourage a family member or carer to stay with them.

Staff had not completed or been provided with some training for people with additional needs, specifically from mental ill health. We requested training information for staff in relation to learning disabilities, autism, mental health and dementia awareness. Data showed 96% of staff had completed training for supporting people with learning disabilities or people with autism. Additional information received during factual accuracy identified 96% of staff had completed dementia awareness training. However, senior leaders told us there was no requirement for staff to complete standalone mental health training, although the overarching provider was considering introducing mental health awareness core skills. In addition to this, senior leaders told us if patients were assessed as requiring a certain level of psychological support during their pre-assessment, a decision would be made as to whether the service was the most appropriate to meet the needs of the patient and would signpost to other services.

Patients understood their condition, care and treatment options. Patients told us staff discussed their care and treatment with them and regularly updated them on their progress. We observed staff discussing patients’ care and treatment with them in ways which were easy for them to understand. Patients undergoing pre-assessment were encouraged to ask any questions during this appointment to ensure they were prepared for their procedure and were aware of the associated risks. We observed staff from theatres completing the pre-operative checklist. Care and attention was taken to ensure patients fully understood the procedure they were due to undergo, and any risks or complications associated with it.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Patients received care and treatment from services that understood the diverse health and social care needs of their local communities. Leaders told us the service had opened targeted services and specialties to meet the needs of the local population. The service continued to assess the needs of the local population and where a need was identified, introduced this if possible. Leaders told us they only recruited specialist staff for services which they provided or were looking to introduce. They did not accept applications from staff across all surgical specialities which they knew they would not provide at this location.

Leaders told us they worked closely with other organisations local to them to meet the needs of the patients. Some services at this hospital were provided by another provider under service level agreements. Where other services were involved with patient care, this was joined up and supported the patient’s choice.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff provided people with information which was tailored to their needs. Staff would document any impairments within the patient’s notes during pre-assessment and would ensure if any additional support was required, this was requested for when the patient was admitted. Staff were also able to place an alert on the patient’s record if they required reasonable adjustments to be made.

Staff had access to a range of communication aids and there were processes available for requesting interpretation and signers for patients who required this service. The service provided staff with access to interpretation support through telephone or an application on a telephone. There were also hearing loops across the service for those who required this due to hearing impairment. There were also Makaton visual aids available to support communication with patients who were non-verbal.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People knew how to give feedback about their experiences including how to raise complaints or concerns. The service clearly displayed information about how to raise a concern in patient areas.

People felt their complaints and concerns would be thoroughly investigated. They felt they would receive a response in a timely manner, and that it would be dealt with in an open and transparent way with no repercussions. Managers investigated complaints and identified themes. Staff knew how to acknowledge complaints and patients received feedback from managers after the investigation into their complaint. There was 1 complaint received in relation to the service between October and December 2025. This related to a short notice cancellation of surgery due to lack of specific equipment which was required. Information indicated there was learning identified from this complaint which was shared with staff.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patients could access care, treatment and support when they needed to and in a way that worked for them. Staff told us patients were able to access services at the hospital within 24 hours if they needed to. From this, any patients who required surgery had a pre-assessment organised as soon as they required this. Staff within pre-assessment offered telephone assessments as well as face to face appointments. All patients were required to complete a health self-assessment prior to their pre-assessment appointment. Information showed between July and December 2025, 1,112 patients underwent surgery at the service and included both day case and inpatient patients. This was an increase of 89% from the same period the previous year.

Managers monitored the waiting times and tried to ensure people could access services in a timely manner. Information shared showed at the time of our inspection, there were no waiting lists for patients, surgery was planned in line with the patient’s wishes. Any urgent surgeries were expedited. Additional information provided showed surgeons rostered themselves into theatre slots to meet the needs of the patients under their care.

Managers and staff worked to make sure patients did not stay longer than they needed to or enabled patients to stay if they were not sufficiently recovered to leave when planned. Staff told us patients stayed for relatively short periods following surgery. However, they did complete more complex surgeries at times which required a longer stay at the hospital for the patient. The service also offered planned day case surgery for patients who discharged the same day once recovered. Information from incident reporting data showed between June 2025 and January 2026 there were 20 unplanned admissions of day case patients who had not recovered sufficiently to be safely discharged. In addition to this, there was 1 patient who was due to discharge from the ward but required an extended length of stay due to clinical concerns.

Managers monitored the readmission rates for surgical patients. Between the period of June 2025 and January 2026, information showed there had been 5 recorded readmissions to the hospital, all of which had been under the colorectal services.

Staff told us ‘on the day’ cancellations of operations and patients not attending planned appointments were minimal within the service. Data showed between July and December 2025, there were 4 occasions when patients did not attend their appointments. During the same period, there had been 15 cancellations on the day of surgery, 67% of these were rearranged for surgery for a different date and 2 patients (13%) no longer required surgery. The information provided did not identify what happened with the other 20% of patients who had a short notice cancellation during this time.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this where possible.

Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different patient groups using their service. Where possible, staff proactively sought out ways to address any barriers and improve people’s experiences. Senior leaders were aware this was a difficult area for their service to address as all patients who used the service were either privately funded or had private medical insurance. However, through research into patients with private medical insurance, the service had identified there was a proportion of patients who did not use their private medical insurance to support their health needs. The service had therefore started a campaign to raise awareness with this group of patients. In turn, this meant those who had private medical insurance could utilise this within services, such as HCA The Harborne, leaving appointments and treatment freed up for patients who were not able to use the services at the hospital.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Patients were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care while they had the capacity to do so. Staff told us they provided care and treatment to patients who underwent surgery for cancer. Staff supported them to make decisions about any advanced plans about their care which included patients who were given a terminal diagnosis. The hospital also had specialist nurses available to support patients with any specific care planning for the future.

When people wanted to express their wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation, they were supported to do so and were able to change their mind if they wished. At the time of our inspection, we did not observe any patients who had a ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation’ form and were therefore unable to review the quality of these forms.