During an assessment of Termination of pregnancy
We carried out this comprehensive assessment on 03 September 2025.
The assessment was undertaken due to the length of time since the previous assessment of the service, which had been carried out using our previous inspection methodology. At this assessment we assessed all quality statements in all key questions under our Single Assessment Framework (SAF). We rated this service good overall.
The inspection team included a lead inspector, a second inspector and a specialist advisor with expertise in midwifery and maternity. We spoke with 9 staff, 7 patients and checked 6 patient records as part of this inspection.
The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed accessible information policy risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. Staff managed medicines well.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Patients were protected and kept safe. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mostly mitigated.
People were active partners in the assessments of their needs. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care and treatment.
There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff involved patients in planning any changes.
Patients were active partners in the assessments of their needs. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, supported them to make decisions about their treatment , and had access to good information. The service had policies and care pathways in place that were in line with national guidance.
The service completed a range of audits, including manual handling, health and safety and Duty of Candour.
Patients had access to good information. Key services were available 5 days a week.
Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand the treatment. They provided emotional support to patients in a professional and non-judgemental way.
The service planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of local people, and the communities served. It also worked with others in the wider system and local organisations to ensure safe care and treatment.
The service provided person centred care and treatment, with patients actively involved in decisions about their treatment.
Information was communicated to patients in a way they could understand. Patients knew how to provide feedback.
Patients received fair and equal care and treatment. Patients were involved in planning their treatment and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities, the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.
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.
The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services, and all staff were committed to improving services continually.
There was a culture of continuous improvement.