National Unplanned Pregnancy Advisory Service Stoke

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people 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.

Observations of patient consultations and records seen showed women and girls were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment, to ensure it was centred around them and their needs. Records showed staff provided information to ensure women and girls were able to make informed choice about treatment options (including any associated risks).

NUPAS Stoke Hub made reasonable adjustments for women and girls and girls where necessary for example bariatric trollies and chairs, a hearing loop system (with blue signs in reception informing women and girls this was available), information in 30 different languages and information suitable for people with a learning disability. The premises were accessible for all, promoting women and girls’ independence whilst acknowledging they may require assistance. There were 2 waiting rooms within the Stoke clinic one of which staff said could be used for a person with a learning disability or autism who may be intolerant to noise or a busy environment.

Staff completed, or arranged, psychosocial assessments and risk assessments for those women and girls and girls thought to be at risk of self-harm or suicide. Pre and post termination counselling was arranged for women and girls presenting with mental health difficulties or who were undecided or struggling with their decision to have a termination.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Care provision was inclusive and the complexity of care was a key consideration of the service which included staff their qualifications and training to support care needs.

There was continuity in people’s care and treatment due to services being flexible and joined up with other services such as NHS urgent care departments and early pregnancy units.

There was at least one clinic open within the Stoke hub everyday Monday to Saturday to enable women and girls’ choice and accessibility to services. The clinics offered appointments between 8.30 and 5.30pm Monday to Saturday. This was positive, particularly if a women and girls had vomited and required an additional dose of the medicine.

Managers had identified gaps in provision and had successfully secured contracts to provide new services in Wolverhampton (opened January 2026) with other new services planned. The provider and commissioners of services had also identified a need for an additional clinic which could provide surgical termination and work was being undertaken to potentially provide this within the Wolverhampton clinic.

The service had systems to ensure neurodivergent women and girls received suitable care. Managers told us staff had accredited training on learning disabilities as part of their mandatory training and were considering annual updates of this training.

The service made additional arrangements for people to meet their individual care needs and reasonable adjustments. This included longer appointments for people who had safeguarding needs, or required translation services and for trans gender men and non-binary people ensured appointments which would not overlap with other women and girls.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

There were arrangements in place to ensure communication was clear, respectful, person-centred, and supported compliance with regulations.

The service complied with the Accessible Information Standard. The standard requires services to provide information in understandable formats and communication support for people with disabilities, impairments, or sensory loss. It mandates identifying, recording, flagging, sharing and meeting the specific needs of a women and girls and girls, for example, providing Easy Read versions of information for people who may struggle with reading.

The women and girls assessment included a field for “communication needs” to ensure any adaptations were recorded and shared with receiving services. Information showed staff identified, recorded communication and information needs at the point of initial patient contact.

They were appropriate arrangements for women and girls whose first language was not English Information about the service and treatments provided was available in different languages and interpreter services could also be arranged. During our onsite assessment several women and girls had appointments whose first language was not English. These women and girls had longer appointments, and arrangements were in place for either an onsite face to face interpreter or a prebooked telephone translation service. Longer appointments were also booked for women and girls who highlighted safeguarding concerns or had a learning disability.

Information was available about the care and treatment women and girls received. A discharge information leaflet was given to women and girls who may need to attend another service.

Managers made notifications to external bodies as needed for example safeguarding teams.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service had a complaints policy which identified actions within identified timescales required when a complaint was received. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Information was available in the clinics we visited which detailed how people could raise concerns. NUPAS was working to improve patient feedback response rates with the increasing digital engagement alongside other systems such as text messaging and QR codes. NUPAS Stoke achieved higher response rate than other NUPAS services with people satisfied with the service they received. Staff knew how to handle complaints appropriately.

NUPAS Stoke had received 5 complaints in the previous 12 months of which 1 was upheld, 2 partially upheld, 1 was still being investigated and 1 was not upheld. We reviewed the response to complaints and found all required actions within the required timescales had been undertaken. Complaints were reviewed and investigated by senior leaders. Complaint responses detailed what had changed since they the person had made the complaint. Staff received feedback on the outcome of investigation of complaints and acted on the findings.

The provider had identified there had been a theme about staff attitude across all services. As a result of this all staff (including NUPAS Stoke staff) had received awareness training in effective communication.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Referral routes to the service included the person’s GP or other health care professionals. People could self-refer through the central booking line seven days a week, 365 days a year. Women and girls had an appointment for a telephone assessment to discuss needs and treatment options. Women and girls who were more than 12 weeks pregnant were offered an appointment for the soonest surgical list at another location. In the event a women and girls was unsuitable for treatment within NUPAS, a same day referral, wherever possible, would be made to an NHS Hospital for treatment.

National guidance states that termination services must offer assessment within five working days of referral or self-referral and offer the termination procedure within five working days of the decision to proceed. Therefore, the total time from seeing the termination provider to the procedure should not exceed 10 working days. Data provided demonstrated that the service managed flow effectively. Average waiting times between 1 January 2026 and 28 February 2026 for initial contact to consultation was 3.5 days, with consultation to treatment being 6.3 days (considering women and girls choice of date, a need for a further scan or women and girls who did not attend).

Information provided showed the percentage of women and girls receiving treatment within ten days of accessing the service was 67% in January 2026 and 69% in February 2026. However, the service monitored reasons for those women and girls exceeding the 10-day target. Data provided demonstrated that women and girls choice / the offered appointment was not suitable to the accounted for the delay in 30% of cases in January 2026 (104 out of 352 women and girls) and 26% in February 2026 (84 out of 326). Those delayed due to the need to rescan accounted for the remaining 3% in January and for 5% in February 2026.

The service reported on did not attend rates (DNA), 55 did not attend in January 2026 and 42 women and girls did not attend in February 2026. Waiting times were captured on the corporate database from the women and girls’ initial contact. The clinic co-ordinator then monitored the waiting lists daily and increased the number of consultation appointments where necessary. Leaders told us that any women and girls contacting the call centre, knowing the gestation of pregnancy may be more than 12 weeks, were offered an appointment at the next consultation clinic.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

NUPAS was committed to diversity and inclusion in all aspects of the business, in relation to the communities they served and clinicians at all levels within the organisation. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes.

Leaders and staff were alerted to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment and support, whether this was from wider society, or within organisational processes and culture or from individuals.

Information provided demonstrated processes which supported equal opportunities for an inclusive and diverse workforce. The equality and diversity policy was the framework for the organisation to support a diverse workforce underpinning other human resources policies such as recruitment.

Staff and leaders, we spoke with told us the service valued diversity in their workforce and worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for its staff. Positive action was being considered to improve the diversity of the workforce to reflect the city’s population and to encourage people from protected groups to participate where their level of participation was disproportionately low.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the women and girls using the service felt empowered to give their views.

The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of their policies and procedures to ensure they did not place vulnerable people or people with protected characteristics at a disadvantage.

All staff received training in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Women and girls were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan their future care. Staff create personalised care plans to account for the women and girls’ needs, wishes and feelings.

Staff supported women and girls to make decisions about their care and treatment for example suitable contraception to meet their needs or signposting them to other services such as sexual health infection screening or their GP or community midwife for an ongoing pregnancy.