Newark Hospital

Updated 7 April 2026

Newark Hospital is part of Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. The hospital provides a range of outpatient clinics, diagnostic tests, therapy services, surgical and medical day case procedures and operations, inpatient services and rehabilitation. The hospital also offers an end of life care service.

Newark Hospital also has an urgent treatment centre, which provides same-day care and treatment of minor injuries and illnesses, from 8am to 10.30pm, with the last patient admitted at 9.30pm.

We undertook an inspection of the end of life care assessment service group on 25 and 26 November 2025. We rated this service good.

Updated 4 August 2025

We carried out this comprehensive inspection on 25 and 26 November 2025. The inspection was undertaken due to the length of time since the previous inspection of the service, which had been carried out using our previous inspection methodology. At this inspection, we assessed all quality statements in all key questions under our Single Assessment Framework (SAF). We rated this service good overall.

The inspection team included a lead inspector, a second inspector and a specialist advisor with expertise in palliative and end of life care. We spoke with 19 staff, 3 patients, 6 relatives checked 7 patient records and 12 Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms.

We interviewed a range of staff including chaplains, mortuary staff, end of life care team members, allied health professionals, nurses and a ward manager.

We also observed staff, care and treatment and reviewed the trust’s performance data.

We inspected Sconce Ward as this was where EOLC patients are admitted to within the hospital service. The ward had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service-controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.

People were active partners in the assessments of their needs. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.

Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and care givers.

The service planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of local people, and the communities served. It also worked with others in the wider system and local organisations to plan care.

Staff talked with patients, families and care givers in a way they could understand and ensured they were full partners in their treatment and care.

Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities.

However, not all ReSPECT orders were completed correctly. The trust did not provide a consultant led daily ward round seven days per week. However, patients and staff could access support 24 hours a day using out of hours escalation processes.

Updated 15 August 2018

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as good because:

• There were good processes in place to prevent avoidable harm.
• Patient risk assessments were routinely completed and nursing records were clear and comprehensive.
• Care and treatment was delivered in line with evidence based, best practice guidance.
• There was a positive multi-disciplinary team (MDT) approach on the wards and departments we visited.
• Consent was well managed and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and associated Deprivation of Liberties Safeguards (DoLS).
• Staff demonstrated a kind and caring approach towards patients and their families. It was obvious that staff had positive relationships with patients and we saw them spend time talking to patients and their families and friends.
• Staff took their time to respond to the individual needs of patients, including those living with a cognitive impairment such as dementia and those living with a learning disability.
• Services were in place to support patients with spiritual and cultural needs.
• All staff we spoke with were enthusiastic and passionate about the work they did.
• There was evidence of clinical governance procedures and quality measurement processes.

However;

• Patients’ medical records were not always clear or legible and it was difficult to find and follow the latest episode of care.
• Some staff we spoke with at the time of the inspection were still unsure of the direction of travel for this hospital. In addition, some staff were unclear about the plans for the Fernwood Unit.

Updated 15 August 2018

We rated it as good because:

• Mandatory training including safeguarding adults was higher than the trust target for mandatory training.
• Staffing levels showed minimum vacancies and a low staff turnover rate.
• Medical records were available for over 98% of the time for clinic appointments.
• There was safe handling and storage of medical records.
• There was evidence of shared learning following incidents and there was a positive culture related to incident reporting.
• Care and treatment was given in line with national evidence based guidance.
• There was a range of facilities to meet peoples nutritional and hydration needs.
• Staff were suitably trained and competent to deliver care effectively.
• Appraisal rates were 98% for outpatients services at Newark Hospital
• There were processes in place to obtain consent in line with policies.
• We saw staff providing compassionate care throughout our visit. Patients spoke highly of the care they received from staff.
• Staff and volunteers provided emotional support to patients during visits to outpatient services.
• A variety of services were being offered which supported the local population.
• There was a large active voluntary service which supported patients, families and staff.
• The ‘did not attend’ (DNA) rate was lower than both the national and trust average.
• Patients were offered a choice of appointments and there had been an increase in attendances for both new attendances (7.4%) and follow up appointments (8.8%).
• Clinic utilisation had improved from 77% to 88.9%.
• There was a clear vision and strategy for the hospital which was shared by leaders, staff and the public. There was evidence of progress and delivery of key objectives within the strategy.
• Leaders were visible and changes that had been made in senior leadership had had a positive impact on staff.
• There was a governance structure and processes that enabled the hospital to monitor and measure performance and to manage risks.
• There were high levels of staff satisfaction. Staff were proud of the hospital as a place to work and spoke highly of the culture.
• There was evidence of a continuous learning culture and progressions of innovation to improve outpatients service at Newark Hospital.

Updated 14 May 2020

Updated 15 August 2018

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as good because:

• Safety was given a high priority, people were protected from avoidable harm and abuse. Lessons were learnt when things went wrong and staff were open and honest with patients. Performance showed a good track record and steady improvements in safety.
• There were clearly defined and embedded systems, policies and procedures to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse. Staffing levels and skill mix were planned and reviewed. Patients were assessed appropriately and their condition monitored for signs of deterioration.
• People had good outcomes because they received effective care and treatment that met their needs. There was participation in local and national audits and information was used to improve care. Staff were competent to carry out their roles and had annual appraisals to determine training and development needs.
• There was evidence of good multidisciplinary working particularly when elderly or vulnerable patients were discharged and needed ongoing care.
• Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and consent to care and treatment was obtained in line with legislation and guidance.
• People were treated with dignity and respect and were involved as partners in their care. Staff responded passionately when people needed help and support and helped patients and those close to them to cope emotionally with their care and treatment.
• Services were planned and delivered in a way that met the needs of the local population. Reasonable adjustments had been made and action taken to remove barriers for people who had difficulty using or accessing services. It was easy for patients to complain or raise a concern.
• There was a clear statement of vision and values driven by quality and safety and the strategic objectives were monitored and reported to the board.
• Good governance procedures and structures were in place which interacted with each other appropriately. Risks were managed and understood by all staff.
• Leaders were visible and supportive, staff were complimentary about local leaders. There was a culture of openness and honesty and mechanisms were in place to support staff and promote positive wellbeing.
• There was effective engagement with local stakeholders and staff, staff actively raised concerns and those who did were supported. Staff proactively sought ways to innovate and improve.

However:

• Two nurse call bells in one of the treatment rooms were attached to extension cables which represented a ligature risk.
• There were no local safety standards in place for invasive procedures.
• The controlled drug storage area was shared with the GP out of hours service which could result in stock control errors.
• Staff were still uncertain about the future of Newark Hospital and the UCC.