KC Dialysis Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained the same. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Well-led.

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

The evidence showed a good standard. The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The service had a clear vision to be a trusted provider of holiday dialysis, ensuring access to kidney care was never a barrier to patients enjoying a holiday in Dorset. Its mission was to deliver safe, compassionate, and high-quality dialysis services, combining clinical excellence with exceptional hospitality to give patients the confidence and freedom to travel.

This vision and mission were underpinned by a set of core values that shaped the culture of the service, including being compassionate without borders, maintaining an unwavering commitment to safety, promoting seamless integration of care, showing respect for every patient's journey, and consistently going the extra mile to meet individual needs. Staff demonstrated a shared commitment to these values, fostering a person-centred culture that prioritised both high-quality clinical care and a positive patient experience.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

The service was led by two directors who were actively involved in the day-to-day operation and management of the centre. Due to the size of the organisation, there was no formal leadership development programme; however, leaders maintained their knowledge, skills and competence through continuing professional development (CPD), attendance at relevant training, engagement with professional networks, and regular review of current clinical guidance, legislation and best practice.

The service demonstrated a commitment to learning and improvement through ongoing review of governance processes, policies, audit outcomes, incidents, patient feedback and regulatory updates. This enabled them to identify opportunities for development and ensure the service remained responsive to patients' needs while maintaining high standards of care.

Should long-term leadership changes become necessary, arrangements would be made to ensure continued compliance with regulatory requirements, including the appointment of suitably qualified and experienced individuals where required.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

Due to the nature of the service, no concerns had been raised at the time of our assessment.

The service had a whistleblowing and speaking up policy that supported an open and transparent culture, enabling staff to raise genuine concerns about wrongdoing, unsafe practice, misconduct or malpractice. The policy provided a clear process for reporting concerns and emphasised that individuals could do so without fear of victimisation, discrimination or disadvantage. The service promoted a culture where concerns could be raised and addressed, helping to ensure patient safety, accountability and continuous improvement within the service.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them.

The size of the service with just 2 staff as part of a family run business meant there was limited ability for formal workforce equality monitoring arrangements or staff networks commonly seen in larger organisations.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

The service had effective governance systems and processes to provide assurance, monitor performance, and drive continuous improvement.

Regular governance meetings provided oversight of incidents, patient feedback, clinical risks, staff training, equipment performance, water quality and service developments. Actions arising from meetings were monitored to ensure improvements had been implemented and sustained. The service maintained a risk register and reviewed dialysis-specific risks, including infection prevention and control, equipment failure and medical emergencies, to ensure mitigating actions remained effective.

We reviewed the annual directors' meeting minutes for 2025 and 2026. Agendas included annual service summaries, operational performance updates, future planning, workforce developments, and strategic priorities, demonstrating senior leadership oversight of service delivery and organisational direction.

We also reviewed nursing team meeting minutes, which were held every six months. Discussions covered patient demand and capacity, clinical standards, patient safety, staff wellbeing, service development, incident learning, and policy updates. These meetings provided a forum for sharing learning, monitoring service performance, and addressing operational and clinical issues.

The service had a clinical governance policy that outlined the governance framework for delivering safe, effective, and person-centred care. Governance arrangements included both an operational risk register and a clinical risk register, which accurately reflected the risks and further actions required. Key operational risks included infection prevention and control, staffing shortages, dialysis equipment failure, and business continuity risks. Key clinical risks related to patient safety and the management of clinical emergencies during dialysis treatment.

Risk registers were reviewed annually to ensure risks remained current and that mitigation plans were effective. In addition, the service had a comprehensive business continuity plan that covered a range of potential disruption scenarios and specified actions to be taken to maintain service delivery and patient safety. These arrangements supported the provider in identifying, monitoring, and mitigating risks while maintaining oversight of service quality and safety.

A comprehensive audit programme monitored the quality, safety and effectiveness of care. Monthly, quarterly and six-monthly audits covered key areas including medicines management, cleaning, hand hygiene, clinical records management, water quality, infection prevention and control, and environmental safety. Audit findings demonstrated high levels of compliance and were reviewed through governance processes to identify learning opportunities and support continuous improvement.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

The service worked collaboratively with a range of partners and stakeholders to support the delivery of safe, effective and coordinated care for people receiving holiday haemodialysis. The service maintained close relationships with NHS renal units, referring consultants and international dialysis providers to obtain up-to-date clinical information, including dialysis prescriptions, blood results, infection screening and relevant medical histories. This enabled continuity of care and supported safe treatment planning for people receiving dialysis away from their usual treatment centre.

Engagement with integrated care boards (ICBs) and other healthcare stakeholders to supported service oversight, assurance and alignment with NHS expectations. Staff worked closely with renal specialists and healthcare professionals to clarify clinical information when required, ensuring care was delivered in accordance with individual treatment plans and reducing the risk of delays or errors.

The service also collaborated with equipment manufacturers and specialist maintenance providers to ensure dialysis equipment and water treatment systems were maintained safely and in line with manufacturer guidance. Safety notices, technical updates and equipment improvements were reviewed and implemented where required to support the safe and reliable delivery of treatment.

Effective communication and information sharing between partner organisations supported joined-up, person-centred care. Clear arrangements for the exchange of clinical information before treatment, escalation of concerns and coordination with external services when required, helping to ensure people received safe and seamless care throughout their treatment journey.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

The service used incidents, feedback, audits and governance processes to identify opportunities for improvement and implement changes to enhance patient safety and quality of care. For example, following an incident involving a patient requiring the toilet during dialysis, the service reviewed the circumstances and introduced a revised procedure to reduce the risk of hypotensive episodes. Learning from incidents was strengthened through the introduction of structured after action reviews, enabling reflective practice and the sharing of learning across the service.

The service demonstrated a proactive approach to service development by regularly reviewing and updating clinical documentation and processes. A diabetes management care plan was introduced to support the safe and consistent assessment of patients receiving holiday dialysis. Annual reviews of referral documentation ensured records remained current and aligned with best practice. Other improvements included enhanced consent forms to support informed decision-making, the incorporation of NEWS2 within patient assessments to aid early recognition of deterioration, and updates to medicines administration records to improve traceability through the recording of batch numbers and expiry dates.

People’s experiences were used to inform service development. The provider actively sought feedback through surveys and informal discussions and reviewed comments to identify opportunities to further enhance the patient experience. Positive feedback and repeat use of the service by patients receiving holiday dialysis provided assurance that the service was responsive to people's needs.