Shakespeare Walk in Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We found that the service involved patients in their care, and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. We heard how the service took time to explain treatment options with patients, and when required worked with, or referred patients to, other services to maximise outcomes for patients. Processes were in place to respond to the needs of individual patients when they attended the service. Staff told us that they felt well supported, and that their wellbeing was seen as being important.

At our last assessment in 2023, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has remained the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Overall, the service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. This included the availability of a private room to discuss their concerns. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency, and there were processes to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support. Chaperones were available for patients who requested them for additional support. We saw that chaperones had been trained and knew how to undertake their duties. As the walk in centre shared the building waiting area with 2 GP practices, clinicians called patients personally and escorted them to the clinical rooms. The provider told us that at times patients could be challenging, especially regarding waiting times. To help manage patient expectations they had produced materials to explain the patient journey through the service. This had been translated to languages such as Arabic, Urdu and Polish.

The service treated people as individuals, and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. For example, staffing usually meant that there were appropriate staff available should a patient request to be seen by a clinician of a specific gender. Patient communication needs were met, and enabled them to be fully involved in their care. The service had access to translation and interpretation services when required, and there was a hearing loop installed at the reception desk.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff told us that they fully explained proposed treatment options with patients, and when appropriate their carers. If services available at the walk in centre were felt to be inappropriate to meet the patient’s needs they were signposted or referred elsewhere.

The service listened to, and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs, and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. The service triaged and prioritised walk in patients as soon as possible after arrival. At busy periods this could take some time, but delays were communicated to patients. Patients allocated appointments via NHS 111 had already received an initial triage, but were re-triaged by the service when required. This triage ensured people with immediate needs were seen promptly. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams. We were informed by the provider and staff of instances when patients had been sent for emergency treatment after triage.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. They supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they felt that they were valued and supported by leaders and managers. The premises had a prayer room available for staff usage. In addition, staff had meetings with managers and leaders on a daily, monthly and quarterly basis. Issues relating to wellbeing and health could be discussed at staff one-to-ones and appraisals, and at Time to Talk sessions. The provider had an assistance programme and occupational health support available to staff. We heard from staff examples of how the provider had supported them during times of ill health. We were informed that the provider had recently introduced a Star of the Month award to recognise staff who had performed well.