Cocoon Harrogate

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 is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant women were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

We looked for evidence women were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that their privacy and dignity was respected, they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We looked for evidence every effort was made to take women’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them.

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 service always treated women with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

Women told us staff treated them with dignity, respected their privacy at all times, and included their partners in appointments. Women said the service provided a safe space which helped reduce their anxiety. They described the kindness, compassion, and care staff showed when delivering difficult news. Women reported staff provided reassurance and support throughout their care.

We observed good staff rapport and empathy with women. Staff broke bad news in private rooms. The scanning room had sound dampening panels for privacy.

The service operated a one-in, one-out policy for women, ensuring they did not pass each other, and longer appointments could be made to further reduce client cross-over. As a result, when staff broke bad news, women did not have to encounter families celebrating positive outcomes.

Staff were discreet and responsive when caring for women and parents to be. Staff took time to interact with women in a respectful and considerate way offering emotional support and advice when they needed it. Constructive observations were seen. Staff were supportive.

Staff were able to describe the emotional and social impact care, treatments or conditions had on women and parents.

The service had a privacy and dignity policy in place. The Registered Manager was responsible for monitoring compliance with the policy.

The service treated women as individuals and made sure women’s care, support and treatment met women’s needs and preferences. They took account of women’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Women told us the staff were responsive and the service was easy to contact. Staff had responded promptly when they had called. Women told us the written information provided was easy to understand.

We observed women being treated as individuals. However, staff seemed unsure how to access interpreters.

The service had an inclusion and exclusion criteria in place to ensure they could meet women’s needs safely.

The service had used an external company to provide an accessibility report on access to the building. Downstairs had step free access. Women and families requiring disabled access could not be catered for in the scanning rooms as these were up steep stairs. The service ensured it could provide scan for these women by closing the unit for the morning/afternoon and turning a suitable room downstairs into a portable scanning room to ensure it was fully accessible.

Dedicated accessible parking spaces and toilets were available.

The service had a disabilities and learning disabilities policy, with an autism and neurodiversity statement in place. It positively welcome those with disabilities and those who identified as neurodivergent.

Leaders told us written information could be provided in an accessible format, if required.

The Registered Manager told us they supported women with cultural, social or religious needs. She was able to describe the process the service had undertaken to meet a women’s religious needs whilst visiting for a scan.

The service promoted women’s independence, so women knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Women told us staff listened, looked after and supported them when they had any concerns.

Written information advised women of their choices and what to expect at the service.

The service informed women that the clinic did not replace their NHS scan appointments or care, rather worked alongside. Staff reminded women they needed to go to the hospital or their GP if they had any concerns about the pregnancy.

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

Staff had received training in breaking bad news and women told us the service was so responsive, they had chosen to go back when pregnant again.

Women reported staff acted quickly when scan results showed they needed urgent review by their local maternity service. Staff provided written letters and copies of the scan for women to take with them.

We observed staff treat women according to their individual needs and were sensitive and empathetic when breaking bad news.

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

Staff reported feeling respected, valued and supported within the service. They described leaders checking on their wellbeing following difficult clinical situations, offering emotional support and flexibility where required. They stated they enjoyed working for the service and felt colleagues were understanding and supportive. Staff reported having access to paid annual leave and sick pay.

The service provided was not large and therefore the staff numbers were small. This meant informal structures such as day to day catch ups to share information was used rather than structured meetings. Staff told us they felt fully informed about what was happening in the service.

An ultrasound work related Musculoskeletal (MSK) policy was in place to support staff who undertook scanning. MSK is a recognised occupational complication for staff undertaking scans. The policy stated leaders would undertake regular ongoing risk assessments of the ultrasound welfare practices and ultrasound environment. We did not find any evidence that ongoing risk assessments had occurred.

They was no long term staff sickness and short term sickness was minimal.

Leaders undertook a formal staff appraisal, (an annual review of staff performance, practice and development), every year with an informal catch up every 6 months.

Staff were supported with flexible working and private healthcare. They had access to free confidential talking therapy and personal training.

Leaders recognised staff wellbeing was important and had recently arranged an away day for all staff.

Leaders had undertaken a recent staff survey which identified staff felt valued and understood how their role contributed to the service’s goals.

Following the on-site inspection leaders advised they planned to support staff wellbeing by producing monthly newsletters which would include information on company progress, plans and objectives and would also undertake a quarterly confidential employee survey.

The service had a lone worker policy; however we saw no evidence that a lone risk assessment had taken place prior to our on-site visit. Following the on-site visits leaders had undertaken a lone worker risk assessment with a full robust list of actions put in place to strengthen process and support.

The disabilities and learning disabilities policy, with autism and neurodiversity statement also covered staff to ensure no discrimination.