The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

24 Church Street, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, DY10 2AW 07429 088660

Provided and run by:
Dr Tariq Mahmood

Important:

We issued an urgent Notice of Decision to Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio run by Dr Tariq Mahmood to suspend the service following significant concerns for people’s safety. We found breaches of the regulations related to safe care and treatment, appropriate recruitment of staff, and good governance at Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio.

All Inspections

During an assessment of Diagnostic imaging

Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio is operated by Dr Tariq Mahmood. The service carries out pregnancy
baby ultrasound scans for souvenir videos or images, rather than for clinical purposes or as part of a
pregnancy pathway of care. Facilities included 1 scanning room and a reception area.
We inspected this service using our focused methodology to check required improvements had been
made since our previous assessment. We carried out an announced assessment (we gave the service
12 days’ notice we were coming to assess to ensure the service was open) on 18 October 2025. This
assessment looked at the safe and well led key questions to assess whether required actions had been
undertaken since our last assessment. Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’
performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.
Throughout the assessment, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood
and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The only service provided by this facility was
ultrasound baby imaging for non-diagnostic purposes.
Himom was last inspected in January 2019 and was rated good overall, with a good rating in safe,
effective, caring and responsive, well led was rated as requires improvement.
A CQC inspector and a specialist advisor visited the service on 18 October 2025. We spoke to 2 staff
including the provider (who was also the clinician) and the operations manager. We looked at 6
patients records.
During this assessment we rated safe and well led as inadequate.
We identified 4 regulation breaches: We found care was not always safe or met required guidelines,
there were insufficient safety checks on the premises, staff recruitment and selection was not robust
and did not meet the regulations and meant unsuitable people may be employed and safeguarding
procedures were not robust and did not provide assurance people would be kept safe from harm. The
service also did not display their service rating as required.
We found the previous breach of Regulation 17 Good governance (1) (2)(a)(b)(d). was not met and is an
ongoing concern.

The overall rating for Himom 4 D Baby Bonding Studio has been downgraded from good overall to
inadequate.
Following our assessment of Himom we issued an urgent suspension of the service.

During an assessment of the hospital overall

Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio is operated by Dr Tariq Mahmood. The service carries out pregnancy ultrasound scans for souvenir videos or images, rather than for clinical purposes or as part of a pregnancy pathway of care. Facilities included 1scanning room and reception area.

We inspected this service using our single assessment framework focused methodology. We carried out an announced assessment on 18 October 2025. We gave the service 12 days’ notice that we were coming to inspect to ensure the service was open. This assessment looked at the safe and well led domains only to assess whether required actions had been undertaken since our last assessment.

Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate. Throughout the assessment, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The only service provided by this facility was ultrasound baby imaging for non-diagnostic purposes.

Himom was last assessed in January 2019 and was rated good overall, with a good rating in safe, effective, caring and responsive. Well led was rated as requires improvement.

The overall rating for Himom 4 D Baby Bonding Studio has been downgraded from good overall to inadequate.

Following our assessment of Himom we issued an urgent suspension of the service.

22 January 2019

During a routine inspection

Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio is operated by Dr Tariq Mahmood. The service carries out pregnancy baby ultrasound scans for souvenir videos or images, rather than for clinical purposes or as part of a pregnancy pathway of care. Facilities include one scanning room and reception area.

The service provides ultrasound baby imaging for non-diagnostic purposes. These are commonly known as ‘keepsake’ or ‘baby souvenir’ scans. They provide parents-to-be with images and/or recordings of their unborn baby as mementoes only.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out a short notice announced inspection (we gave staff four days’ notice that we were coming to inspect) on 22 January 2019.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The only service provided by this facility was ultrasound baby imaging for non-diagnostic purposes.

Services we rate

We rated it as Good overall.

We found areas of good practice:

  • The provider had the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.

  • Staff cared for women with compassion, kindness and respect. They involved women and those close to them in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • Current evidence-based guidance and good practice standards were used to inform the delivery of care and treatment. The provider demonstrated understanding of the guidance and legislation that affected their practice.

  • The service had a vision, where the delivery of quality care was the top priority, and the provider worked to achieve it.

  • The provider promoted a positive culture.

  • The provider monitored scan image quality and gender determination outcomes.

  • Women could access services and appointments in a way and time that suited them.

  • The provider understood how and when to assess whether a woman had the capacity to make decisions about their care.

  • Services provided reflected the needs of the population served and individual needs were taken into account.

We found areas of practice that require improvement:

  • We were not assured that sufficient governance arrangements were in place to ensure high standards of care were maintained. There was no system in place to manage and monitor incidents, complaints and risks.

  • There was no system in place to identify training needs and monitor compliance.

  • There was no checklist in place to show when the environment and equipment was cleaned, or that equipment was checked regularly to ensure it was fit for purpose.

  • The provider did not give women a written record of their findings if they found a suspected concern and needed to refer them to NHS services.

  • There was limited engagement with women, those close to them and the public, and we did not find any evidence of change because of comments or complaints received.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with one requirement notice that affected Himom 4D Baby Bonding Studio. Details are at the end of the report.

Amanda Stanford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (Central)

12 August 2013

During a routine inspection

The service provided a non- diagnostic pregnancy ultrasound scanning service for people. During this inspection we spoke with five people who used the service, the provider and one member of staff. People we spoke with were complimentary about the care that they received. One person said: “They are fantastic. I recommended it to a friend of mine. Brilliant quality”.

People were supported in making the decision about having an ultrasound scan. This was through information about the procedures on the web site and in the service's information leaflet. We saw in people's records that consent to the ultrasound procedure had been sought on the day of the appointment.

The sonographer spoke directly to people prior to their appointment if they had any concerns or required more information about the procedure. The service had procedures in place to manage emergencies or when they identified concerns on the scans.

The service had policies and procedures in place relating to 'safeguarding vulnerable adults' and 'child protection'. Staff were aware of what action they would take if they suspected abuse.

Staff had not been recruited in an appropriate way and checks had not been undertaken that ensured they were suitable to care for people.

We found that any comments and complaints people made would be responded to appropriately and ensured that people were listened to.