The Countess of Chester 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

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

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 evidence showed a good standard. 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 spoke with patients from different areas of medical care who shared their experiences and were very positive about their care, consistently highlighting the kindness and compassion of staff. All patients reported feeling well supported with personal hygiene and daily care needs. We also spoke with relatives of 3 patients, who were equally positive about the care their loved ones received.

Friends and Family Test (FFT) scores were high, at 86.6% in September 2025 and 88.1% in October 2025. A Patient Experience Steering Group, chaired by the Director of Nursing, reviewed these results and monitored related actions, with updates shared across wards and departments.

The Trust received 477 responses to the National Inpatient survey which was published in September 2025. The response rate had improved from the previous year which had 457 responses. The response rate for the trust was 41.9% and of the respondents 94% had been through urgent care and 6% planned care. Patients reported positive experiences of staff, particularly regarding their helpfulness and the overall quality of care. Areas identified for improvement included waiting times and follow-up after discharge.

People living with disabilities, frailty, dementia, mental health conditions, mobility issues, and those admitted as emergency patients reported poorer experiences. In contrast, older people, men, elective patients, and those not identified as frail generally reported more positive experiences.

Staff were observed to be discreet, responsive, and respectful when delivering care. They took time to engage with patients and those close to them, explaining procedures and treatments clearly. We observed consistently kind and caring interactions, including calm and compassionate communication with patients living with dementia.

Patients told us they felt treated with dignity and kindness, and that communication was good. They said staff were knowledgeable about their care and treatment and shared information appropriately.

Privacy was maintained during consultations, with curtains and doors closed. Staff demonstrated an understanding of, and respect for, patients’ personal, cultural, social, and religious needs and how these related to their care.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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 trust showed improvement across several survey measures of the National Inpatient survey, with 99% of patients reporting they were treated with kindness and compassion, and 97% feeling treated with respect and dignity.

Patients were offered culturally and religiously appropriate food and drink, including in the discharge lounge, and meals were provided when transport delays occurred.

A patient and relative on the stroke unit reported feeling well supported, noting encouragement to undertake tasks within their capabilities, which aided rehabilitation.

The Safeguarding and Complex Care Team supported patients with Learning Disabilities (LD) and/or Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC). The team flagged records and implemented reasonable adjustments for those patients referred to them. Individualised communication tools and collaborative care pathways were used as needed, with coordination between home, school, work, and hospital settings.

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

A recent external survey indicated that the trust had achieved positive outcomes across a range of measures, with 97% of patients reporting strong confidence and trust in both nursing and medical staff. Many people stated that they felt actively involved in discussions about their care. In addition, 94% of patients said that doctors answered questions in a way they could easily understand.

On the longer stay ward, we observed that patients had access to individualised and personalised bedding, along with additional home comforts to enhance their comfort during their stay. This approach was encouraged to lift morale and promote individual choice.

We also observed posters promoting safe recovery and mobility, encouraging patients to mobilise safely to prevent deconditioning and support independence.

Patients told us they had contributed to their care plans, were aware of their treatment plans, and regularly spoke with both medical and nursing staff about their care, treatment, and discharge arrangements.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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 provided patients and their families with practical assistance, emotional support, and guidance when needed. They responded to distressed patients in a respectful and compassionate manner. Private rooms were used to discuss sensitive information or deliver difficult news, ensuring confidentiality and comfort.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the emotional and social impact of a person’s care, treatment, or condition on both patients and their loved ones. The hospital offered additional support through chaplaincy to provide further support to patients and their relatives.

Patients reported that call bells were answered promptly, which we also observed during our assessment.

We observed notice boards on every ward displaying thank you cards and comments from patients’ relatives, expressing appreciation for staff support and the high quality of care provided.

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

Staff had access to a wide range of wellbeing support through the trust’s wellbeing team and hubs. They could refer themselves or be referred by managers for one to one support. Around 200 staff volunteers, including mental health first aiders and wellbeing champions, offered peer support and guidance.

Wellbeing hubs were open 24/7 and provided information, rest spaces, and specialist support, such as help with alcohol, miscarriage or baby loss, and counselling through partner organisations. Occupational health was also available for advice on fitness for work and staff wellbeing.

The wellbeing team ran drop-in sessions on wards after incidents, busy periods, or significant events. Staff could access the employee assistance programme at any time for counselling, as well as advice on money, housing, relationships, or domestic abuse.

Workshops and training covered stress, resilience, mental health awareness, and self-care. The hubs organised activities and health checks, and staff at higher risk received extra follow-up support. Nursing advocates and professional development teams offered clinical supervision and support for ward managers, especially during busy periods.

Newly qualified clinical staff received support through the preceptorship programme, and all staff discussed wellbeing during annual appraisals. Additional support was available through HR, freedom to speak up guardians, nursing leads, and the internal transfer scheme.