CJA Medical

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

Caring – This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Requires Improvement.

The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to good governance and dignity and respect.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not respect people’s privacy and dignity.

During our onsite visit, there was no signage informing people that CCTV cameras were in operation, which is required under UK law to ensure people are made aware of surveillance. This was despite CCTV cameras observed as being insitu in the service’s treatment rooms. Following our onsite visit, the service provided evidence to demonstrate some cameras had been disconnected and signs had been installed near the cameras still insitu. But it still did not have a CCTV or data‑usage policy outlining the purpose of the surveillance and maintaining people’s dignity. Staff had also received no training relating to the appropriate use of CCTV surveillance, data protection obligations, or how to respond to concerns about privacy.

We were unable to verify feedback on the service to check people were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion in relation to their care and treatment due to the service not actively collecting feedback such as surveys to demonstrate oversight of themes and trends.

However, we observed staff treating colleagues and others from stakeholder organisations with kindness and respect during our on-site visit.

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 aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics from the clinical records we reviewed. Staff took time to understand what they wanted to achieve from treatment and discussed realistic outcomes tailored to their lifestyle, age and expectations. Staff adapted their communication to meet different levels of understanding and provided clear information to support informed decisions.

Staff recognised people’s needs to have access to, and links with, their advocacy and support networks in the community and they supported people to do this. People’s communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. For example, people's families and next of kin were involved in consultations where desired, ensuring their views were considered. Where people required translation support or did not speak English as a first language, the service ensured alternative arrangements were available.

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 as part of the consultation and treatment process with people, they explained the risks, benefits and alternatives of each procedure clearly and provided written information to help them think through their options. Staff told us they never pressured people into treatment and people could change their mind at any time.

Consultations were structured to give people space to ask questions and consider their decisions. Cooling‑off periods were built into the process for elective cosmetic procedures, enabling people to reflect before consenting. Staff also encouraged people to raise concerns or request additional time if they were unsure.

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 we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support.

The service demonstrated how people were able to access care for their immediate needs, including reasonable adjustments to assist them in this process. For example, people always had appointments offered at times that suited them, with a choice of clinician for continuity of care and to ensure their health needs would be addressed. All information on people’s immediate needs was recorded on the person’s clinical records, so they did not need to be asked or requested on each occasion. We saw evidence which demonstrated responsiveness with aftercare queries, often with same-day advice. Staff used clear escalation processes when someone presented with unexpected side effects, ensuring people received prompt clinical assessment and follow‑up.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff told us they had opportunities to develop their skills, including continuous professional development, documented in their appraisals. They reported having access to supervision and relevant training to maintain competence in aesthetic practice and cosmetic procedures. Staff described open communication with leaders and felt their contributions were valued. They told us they could raise concerns or suggestions without fear and felt listened to when discussing service provision within daily huddles or appraisals. Staff were offered an employee assistance program (EAP) through the service’s occupational health service partner.