FKS Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. 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. People with protected characteristics felt supported. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the others to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a shared culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their families. The senior team had a vision and strategy, but more could be done to ensure that every member of the team was aware of this. However, all members of staff wanted to ensure that the patient’s experience was one of choice and great customer service. Having only one or two patients in the clinic at any one time ensured that all staff were able to focus on providing good patient care.

The service had inclusive leaders who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. Leaders of the service had undertaken this procedure for many years and understood differing patient perceptions, fears and anxieties. Leaders were compassionate to staff and to patients involving them in decisions and open to differing viewpoints.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The team had a “Town Hall Meeting” which enabled staff to raise any issue however, small to the leadership team in an open and listening environment. Staff felt free to raise issues with any member of the senior team knowing it would be addressed.

All members of the service were known to each other either professionally or personally. Whilst this enabled a shared culture of openness and inclusivity it limited the services ability to have diversity within their workforce. It was not clear how the service promoted equality of opportunity through employment of staff. However, once employed there was equity of opportunity for training and development for all staff. This included attendance at conferences.

The service had clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability. There were systems in place to ensure good governance, but this was in its infancy. The service was keen to use feedback to improve their systems and processes. An example of this was when we raised concerns about the air flow in the procedural rooms the provider took our feedback on board and produced a risk assessment of how they would improve air flow. Similarly senior staff were keen to amend policies so that staff had better guidance to ensure safe systems of work to deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. Senior staff acted on information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. Outcome measures were in place but were due to be completed a year after opening. Therefore, at the time of our inspection as the service had not been operating for 12 months, this outcome data was not available.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. Medical staff shared information with partners such as general practitioners to collaborate to drive improvements for the patients. This included when they identified deficiencies or areas where patients required treatment pre hair transplant to ensure that they had the best outcome from their transplant. The senior team highlighted that at times they found it difficult to work with others as partners in the care sector could be dismissive.

The senior team focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the service. Staff were encouraged to find creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. All staff attended conferences in developments in hair transplant technologies. The attendees shared this knowledge with others through regular staff meetings. The senior team were experienced in hair transplantation and kept up to date with new technologies to improve the service for patients.