HMP Fosse Way

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 assessed 2 quality statements for this key question. We found that complaints were well managed, and patient engagement work was in the early stages of development.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

Care planning for patients with long term conditions was not consistently personalised. In a number of records we reviewed, care plans contained inappropriate or generic template text such as ‘patient to call 999’ or ‘order repeat medicines online,’ which were not suitable in a prison environment. Care plans did not routinely demonstrate patient involvement and lacked sufficient detail in relation to patients’ clinical observations, individual needs and agreed goals. This limited the effectiveness of care planning in supporting the ongoing management of long term conditions. However, we saw evidence that improvements were being made, with more recent care plans showing greater personalisation following increased familiarity with the recording of templates.

Goal setting tools for substance misuse patients were excellent. Clear person-centred goals were evident in patient records and demonstrated co-production of the care plan between recovery workers and patients. Clinical care planning was restricted by generic templates, however we found clinical records with detailed discussions and actions agreed between the prescriber and patient.

The judgement for Care provision, Integration and continuity is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Providing Information is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

Patient complaints were managed in a timely and professional manner. A clear complaints process was in place, and complaints were logged, investigated and responded to appropriately.

The introduction of specific healthcare complaint boxes on the house blocks had led to a significant increase in complaints, indicating improved accessibility for patients. Responses we reviewed were professional and empathetic, and response times had improved significantly since January 2026.

Access to complaint forms required patients to request them from the medicines’ hatch which could present a barrier. Plans were in place to introduce a specific complaints clinic to address patient concerns directly.

Patient engagement was developing. While formal healthcare forums were not yet established, healthcare representation at prison council meetings was in place.

A new patient engagement lead had been appointed and was proactively gathering patient feedback. Plans were in place to introduce paid healthcare champions, which had the potential to significantly strengthen patient involvement.

The judgement for Equity in access is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Equity in experiences and outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Planning for the future is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.