• Community
  • Community healthcare service

Farnham Hospital and Centre for Health

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Hale Road, Farnham, Surrey, GU9 9QL (01483) 782000

Provided and run by:
HCRG Care Services Ltd

Important: This service was previously managed by a different provider - see old profile

All Inspections

Other CQC inspections of services

Community & mental health inspection reports for Farnham Hospital and Centre for Health can be found at HCRG Care Services Ltd. Each report covers findings for one service across multiple locations

26 January 2023

During a routine inspection

We rated this location as good because:

  • Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety and controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. There was appropriate medicines management process in place. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, checked that patients had access to enough food and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it, although some services were reporting high waiting times.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However;

  • Managers and team leaders did not ensure that clinical supervision was always recorded in line with policy. It was not clear how the teams identified and recorded personal areas for development through the supervision programme.
  • Managers did not always record in staff appraisals the strengths of the appraisee and the areas they needed to improve on, in line with the provider’s overall strategy.
  • The service was reporting a high waiting list for podiatry of up to 84 weeks. Staff reported this was as result of podiatry services being suspended during Covid-19 pandemic and national shortage of podiatrists. We were concerned that people who needed the service may not always get timely interventions.
  • Rapid response/ intermediate care teams did not ensure that patients were contacted within the 24- 48 hours response time set by commissioners.
  • The service was reporting a vacancy rate of 12.2% across all staff group. Staff reported that the teams were quite stretched which had been impacted by sickness and people going on leave. However, staff reported the workload was generally manageable.

3 December 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited Runfold ward, Bentley ward, the day assessment unit and the Outpatients department on the day of our inspection. We also spoke with 14 patients, 3 family members of patients, and 12 members of staff.

We found that records were very well completed and provided comprehensive evidence that patients had care delivered according to their preferences and needs. They showed that the multidisciplinary team worked together to meet the wider needs of patients.

The individual care pathways seen had been completed appropriately and individual risk assessments were updated as necessary. Rehabilitation pathways ensured that patients were encouraged and supported to regain their levels of independence, as far as was possible. This meant that patients experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

We found that staff were supported in their training and development. We were also told by staff that they felt supported in their roles by their managers and colleagues.

We found that the hospital was clean and that infection control was taken seriously. We also found that the hospital listened to patient's comments and complaints about the service and made changes to the service where they were indicated.

28 February 2013

During a routine inspection

Patients told us that they were well cared for on the ward that they had a very good choice of meals and that staff come as quickly as they can when the call bell was rung. They said they felt involved in their care.

Everyone we spoke with was very positive about the care and treatment they, or their relative, had received. They described the staff as being kind and helpful.

We found that records were very well completed and provided comprehensive evidence that people had care delivered according to their preferences and needs. They showed that the multidisciplinary team worked together to meet the wider needs of patients. The rehabilitation pathways ensured people were encouraged and supported to regain independence, as far as was possible.