Hey Baby 4D Middlesbrough

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 inspection for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

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.

Person centred care was embedded throughout the service. The service had designed the environment with people at the centre of the decision-making process.

Staff were trained in equality and diversity and would ask people their preferred pronouns to ensure addressing people respectfully.

The electronic system used allowed options to highlight different colours for different people. For example, people who had previously been referred on to NHS services and had re-booked were marked in a different colour. This supported staff to ensure they were aware of potential risks and increased sensitivity when seeing people.

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.

The service planned care in a way that met the needs of the local population. The links with the local NHS services allowed for joined up working and clear communication between services.

Services offered met assessed needs in a timely way. People were able to make same day bookings and were directed to contact the provider if they could not find a timeslot to suit themselves. Appointments were routinely offered six days a week with a range of afternoon and evening appointments during the week and extended hours to provide morning appointments at the weekend.

Staff had started to develop links with local community services, including those for mental well-being support and for supporting children with life-limiting health conditions. This supported staff to be confident in signposting to other appropriate services enabling choice for people using the service.

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

The service provided appropriate information about each scan package and blood test. This information was clearly detailed on the website with a tab giving the option to translate the information into different languages. All staff were able to clearly outline the types of scan package and blood tests provided.

People attending were provided with a copy of their images and scan report. The records were stored electronically on password protected devices and backed up.

Information was provided on other support services and NHS maternity care provision on posters displayed around the service and on the website. The importance of continuing with routine NHS maternity was made clear to people attending.

Information on how to complain and give feedback was clearly displayed in the waiting area and had a QR code for easy access.

Signage was in place advising people of Closed-Circuit Television Usage (CCTV).

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

The service displayed information on how to complain. There was a QR code available to scan and a process outlined for raising concerns or complaints. An email address for the registered manager was displayed within the service along with details of an independent complaints service should people wish to have their complaints externally reviewed.

Staff were focused on providing good care and quick resolution. Any complaints were reviewed on receipt and direct resolution with people sought as soon as possible. For any complex complaints there was support from the national Hey Baby 4D network to peer review complaint responses. People were made aware of changes to policy and procedures as a result of raising their concerns.

The provider looked for themes in complaints and provided an example where a theme had emerged relating to gender scans. A clear action was taken which had seen a significant reduction in the number of complaints relating to the same theme.

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.

Staff told us they would make reasonable adjustments for people if required. They did not have any examples of adjustments that had been made but explained the information gathered through the booking process would support consideration of any adjustments needed.

Appointments were available over six days a week offering a range of timeslots with the opportunity for people to contact the service to make individual arrangements if they could not find a timeslot to suit them. The booking system remained open for people to book same day appointments.

All staff were aware of factors that could impact discrimination and inequality and subsequently disadvantage different groups of people within society from accessing the service.

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.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

Staff used information people provided about themselves in advance of people attending for appointments to ensure an equitable service could be provided for all. For example, a consent form had been translated to Arabic for one person.

Staff used feedback to ensure that all people received equitable experiences and outcomes. There were clear processes for rescans where, for example, it had not been possible to confirm a gender due to positioning.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.