Window To The Womb

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

This means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we did not rate effective. At this assessment, we rated this key question good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Effective.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The service had systems in place to identify risks prior to the women attending the clinic. The service’s booking form including key information such as the estimated date of delivery, date of positive test, risk assessments, cultural needs, language requirement and information around women’s needs or support needed. This information was used by staff to risk assess and identify women needs and eligibility at booking.

Staff carried out obstetric ultrasound scans that met the needs and wellbeing of women identified during booking and clinic assessment.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

The service used up-to-date policies to deliver care. The service’s policies covered a wide range of topics including female genital mutilation, chaperones for people using the service, and infection prevention and control. The service’s policies referenced and were in line with national and professional guidelines. For example, the fetal ultrasound policy referenced guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme (FASP). All policies were in-date at the time of inspection. Policies were available on the staff intranet, and some were also available as hard copies on a noticeboard in the reception area. Staff were able to find and reference these policies easily.

Staff ensured that women were referred to NHS pathways if women needed to be signposted, including local NHS maternity units and gynaecology units, and the service had a documented escalation process in place when handling abnormal findings. The service would immediately contact NHS emergency services, which was documented in the service’s policy for dealing with emergency situations.

The service had systems in place to receive alerts from relevant medical bodies, such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS). These were distributed by the Window to the Womb brand to the service through the area manager and the registered manager.

However, when issues were identified during a scan, or when staff were informed of medical symptoms, women were not always provided with appropriate advice. For example, when women presented with bleeding from the vagina, the service did not consistently explore whether this had been discussed with a GP or midwife previously.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff described the culture within the service as being positive. Staff told us that they felt confident they could bring their concerns about the service to those in management positions, and that senior staff were available to assist with training. Staff reported that there was a daily team briefing, and we observed professional and efficient communication between team members. Staff reported good relationship with external and local NHS maternity services to deliver safe and effective care to women who accessed the service.

All staff had annual appraisals, which were recorded and logged. These focused on positive contributions to the service, as well as areas for improvement.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduced their future needs for care and support.

The service stocked a range of leaflets in the reception area for women to review. These included information on baby movement, baby growth, and influenza immunisations. A poster offering information about domestic abuse was displayed on the inside of a bathroom door.

If a scan revealed an abnormal finding, leaflets containing further information about these results were given to the woman. If a scan revealed a significant medical issue, the service had systems in place enabling them to notify the woman's GP and to arrange appropriate NHS care. Staff were able to demonstrate these systems to us. If a scan revealed the presence of a medical emergency, such as an ectopic pregnancy, the service had systems in place to ensure women received immediate medical care. We saw documentation that confirmed that staff followed these systems. The service had information in the clinic and on their website, which signposted women to mental health services and resources.

Staff assured us that there were systems in place to ensure that scans provided by the service did not replace NHS antenatal scans. The service had policies to ensure that the importance of NHS scans, such as the 12-week antenatal scan, was emphasised to women. Staff told us that they did not perform scans for women who had missed significant portions of their NHS care, and that they emphasised to women that their services were not a replacement for NHS care. This was in line with best practice to ensure the safety of the women and babies. If a scan was refused, refunds were provided.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service completed internal clinical assessments of sonographers employed by the service. We reviewed a clinical assessment of a sonographer at this service, which took place in November 2025. This assessment was based on the observation of 6 scans and included reviews of scan technique, report accuracy, and adherence to scan protocols. Both good practice and areas for improvement were noted. These assessments took place annually.

The service undertook annual compliance audits to review whether staff were following its policies. We reviewed the most recent audit for this service, which took place in July 2025. This audit was undertaken by an employee of the wider Window to the Womb franchise and covered areas such as health and safety, infection control, and staff records. Required actions were noted at the time of the audit and further notes were made when these actions were completed. The clinic manager also undertook monthly audits of the service’s records, including ensuring that policies were in-date.

The service had key performance indicators (KPIs), which were used to assess its overall performance. Examples of KPIs included a rescan rate (the percentage of women having to re-attend for another scan). The service had met its rescan rate target in the year prior to the inspection. Other KPIs reflected the service’s operation as a business, such as the number of scans completed and the total revenue generated.

The service encouraged all women to submit a review of their experience of care electronically to promote learning and improve women outcomes. Managers discussed patient feedback in meetings with staff to monitor themes and trends and take appropriate action. This ensured staff met both clinical expectations and the women’s expectations.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Consent forms were given to women explaining the procedure to be undertaken, scope of the service and limitations of scans. These had to be signed in front of a member of staff. Consent was again gained in-person by the staff member completing the scan. This was documented in all the scan reports we reviewed. Women were chaperoned during their scans by a scan assistant.

The service was prepared to provide services, if required, to those under the age of eighteen. The service’s consent policy contained guidelines on how to ensure that these women provided informed consent for their care. Staff also received training in this area and were aware of key concepts such as Fraser guidelines and Gillick competencies. Staff had completed training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005.