The New Foscote Hospital

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 looked for evidence that people were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that people’s privacy and dignity was respected, that they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We also looked for evidence that every effort was made to take people’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

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

We scored the service as 3. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed staff behaved with kindness and compassion when interacting with patients, providing people with help and support when they needed it. For example, we observed a patient become distressed on the way to surgery; they were comforted and reassured by staff on the ward, and adjustments made to support their emotional wellbeing.

People felt they were treated with dignity and respect. Staff were discreet, responsive and respectful when caring for patients, this was consistently witnessed in the ward environment. Doors and curtains were closed to maintain patients’ privacy and patients talked to in a calm and respectful manner.

Patient’s gave positive feedback about the service. The December 2025 patient survey showed 99% of patients felt they were treated with dignity and respect. When feedback was less positive, action plans were put in place including ‘You Said, We Did’ plans.

Staff made sure patients and those close to them understood their care and treatment. Patients had clear, up to date care plans, and staff knew the individual requirements of patients in their care. We saw staff of all grades explaining to patients the plan of care in a clear and comprehensive way. We reviewed 5 care plans at the assessment, and all were fully complete.

Staff maintained the confidentiality of information about patients. Patient notes were kept in the staff office as was the electronic patient board. All electronic records were secure and password protected.

We scored the service as 3. The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service made reasonable adjustments for patients when required. For example, although the pre assessment questions were electronic, the team would facilitate face to face assessments for those patients with additional needs and arrange on site visits for patients to support those more anxious about surgery.

The service ensured an accessible feedback form was present in each patient’s room and patients reported knowing how to raise a concern or complaint, the form was accessible via a QR code, but paper copies were available on request.

Plans of care for patients reviewed individual needs. Staff understood peoples personal, cultural, social and religious needs and this was reflected in individual plans of care.

We scored the service as 3. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

We reviewed consent forms and individual care plans. All documents were completed and patients reported these were reviewed in full with them, and that their choices were valued. One patient said they felt ‘in control and like the team listen to me’. We saw staff gain both verbal and written consent for a variety of treatment and interventions that were required.

Patients had a choice of food to meet the dietary requirements of religious and ethnic groups and to account for allergies and intolerances. Staff were able to contact the kitchen directly for specific requirements.

Staff explained how they used communication aids and translation services where necessary and the service used language line if needed to ensure patients were always involved in decision making and were fully informed. We saw patients’ families and carers be fully involved in conversations around care.

We scored the service as 3. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff ensured patients on the ward had their needs met including access to call bells, water and other aids. We observed call bells being answered promptly by staff and patients spoken to reported that staff were ‘attentive’ and ‘did everything needed’.

Staffing levels on the day of assessment were good and staff reported they felt staffing levels enabled them to provide the care needed to patients promptly, with one staff member reporting they ‘always have time to provide care’.

Patients told us their post-operative pain was managed promptly and medication charts reflected this on the ward. Staff were seen to respond quickly to patients needs and listened to any issues that were raised. We witnessed the prompt response to a patient who had pain after their surgery.

Staff were aware of post-operative risks and monitoring and ensured patients had prompt reviews. Patient documentation showed appropriate checks were completed and patients reported they were well cared for, including one patient who said, ‘the staff go above and beyond for me’.

We scored the service as 3. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff felt they could raise concerns safely and understood the pathways to do so; feeling leaders were accessible and approachable. Staff described a supportive culture where senior leaders were visible with many reporting the matron and other senior leaders had an ‘open door policy’.

Staff had access to support for their physical and emotional wellbeing through an occupational health service. They received a staff handbook containing wellness resources and clear information about the support available. The hospital offered a range of benefits to promote staff wellbeing, engagement, and development. These included access to an Employee Assistance Programme, private medical insurance with a GP and mental health support, discount platforms, and discounted treatments within the service.

Staff achievements were recognised through SharePoint communications, newsletters, annual staff awards, and the Employee of the Quarter programme, celebrating individual contributions and promoting a positive team culture.

The organisation demonstrated a commitment to career development and lifelong learning, supporting opportunities such as scrub nurse development, progression from Healthcare Assistant to Sterilisation Technician roles, graduate Chartered Accountancy sponsorship, department-specific professional development programmes, and access to an MBA programme. Staff wellbeing was further supported through initiatives including a confidential weight management programme and incentive-based schemes promoting healthy lifestyles. Staff spoke positively about teamwork and the culture within the service.

Staff undertook an annual survey from which action plans were created. These results and action plans are shared with staff. Areas for improvement are identified and timescales for these clear. The service held monthly ‘listening to staff’ forums.