Basingstoke and North Hampshire 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 as 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.

The service provided a good standard of care, which was reflected in staff consistently demonstrating kindness, respect, and consideration to patients individual needs, choices, and dignity. Staff adapted care for diverse groups and promoted patient control over their treatment. However, the service experienced some shortfalls in immediately responding to basic patient needs, such as ensuring accessible water and reachable call bells for immobile patients. Although leaders promptly corrected these issues. While the service supported staff wellbeing, the pace of ongoing organisational change contributed to a notably more negative perception of working life among staff compared to the rest of the trust.

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.

Description: We always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion and we respect their privacy and dignity. We treat colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

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.

Staff treated patients with kindness and compassion. For instance, staff described how they provided a single room for a patient from a travelling community to accommodate numerous visitors. We observed staff protecting patient dignity during a public cardiac arrest by moving visitors away and using privacy screens. We spoke with 3 patients experiencing mental health distress who described staff as kind, caring, and respectful during a difficult and emotional time. They reported feeling safe while waiting to see the mental health team.

Staff told us they treated all individuals with protected characteristics with equal respect and kindness. And staff could explain what protected characteristics are, such as disability, race or religion. This meant patient care was inclusive.

There was a quiet room designed to provide a calm space for patients and families experiencing distress or receiving bad news. This room offered comfortable seating, soft lighting, and complimentary tea and coffee. Additionally, a paediatric mental health room offered a safe, calm, and ligature-free environment for children and adolescents in mental health crises, promoting their safety, dignity and privacy.

Staff and leaders reported receiving praise from both patients and peers, who described them as professional, passionate, and dedicated. One patient commented how staff were “very caring, polite, and understanding,” while another noted they were “caring and responsive.” The department’s newsletter highlighted several individuals who received ‘certificates of fabulous’ for their exceptional care. Further patient feedback praised staff for being “gently spoken,” “reassuring,” and “attentive” to patients pain and anxiety.

The paediatric ED team offered compassionate care tailored to younger patients. We observed a nurse updating a patient on their care, asking about their comfort, and offering drinks. Staff told us they gave children gifts on their birthdays, offered snacks and juice, and gave out ‘I am brave’ stickers. Staff were observed offering ice lollies to children during the hot weather. One mother reported nurses were “very helpful” during her child’s unresponsive episode, and another patient described staff as “very caring when taking blood.” This meant staff were adaptable and tailored care to help children and families receive a more positive, supportive, and less frightening experience in the ED.

Description: We treat people as individuals and make sure their care, support and treatment meets their needs and preferences, taking account of their strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

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.

Staff demonstrated individualised care by adapting their approach to meet the specific needs of patient groups, including those with disabilities, and complex additional requirements. Staff told us how they adjusted their clinical interactions to ensure patient comfort and safety. For example, a doctor and nurse showed their awareness of a patient with autism by ensuring they had extra time and space to make decisions about their care. In another example, staff described how they supported a patient with severe anxiety by allowing a family member to remain present throughout their care.

The Emergency Department (ED) provided staff with specific tools to overcome common barriers to care, ensuring treatment was personalised. Staff told us they had access to an ‘Everything I need hospital bag’, which contained sensory items, pictorial flashcards, easy-to-read guides, and information about translation services. This allowed staff to tailor their approach for diverse patient groups, ensuring people with specific needs (such as learning disabilities or language barriers) received care and treatment that aligned with both their clinical requirements and their personal wishes. Staff knew where to find these resources when needed.

Description: We promote people’s independence, so they know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment, and wellbeing.

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.

The service provided patients with multiple avenues to exercise their independence, choice, and control over their care. Staff could describe how young adults, and their parents were supported to ensure patients’ voices were heard. For example, we saw posters around the department about how to provide feedback on care, or how to raise concerns if a person was not happy about the care they were receiving.

Staff spoke about how they supported patients with mental health needs to understand treatment decisions. They kept them informed of the next steps in their assessments with mental health services to ensure they could inform them of their treatment decisions. We spoke with 3 patients awaiting a mental health review during our inspection and these patients told us they felt safe and understood what their treatment plans were.

We observed posters about Martha’s Rule and the availability of chaperones was visible. Martha’s Rule is a safety mechanism designed to empower patients, families, or advocates to request an urgent second medical opinion from an independent senior team if they are concerned that a patient’s condition is worsening and feel their concerns are not being acted upon. This enabled patients to actively participate in their care and raise immediate safety concerns.

Description: We listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. We respond to these in that moment and will act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment.

While leaders took immediate and effective action to address concerns raised during the inspection, some basic patient needs were initially overlooked. For example, on day 1 we observed 10 patients in the major’s area who lacked accessible water and patient tables. The availability of water, squash, tea, coffee and vending machines were readily available in the waiting room. However, this could only be accessed by patients who were independently mobile. This concern presented a potential dehydration risk for those with mobility issues, or those who could not advocate for themselves. Following intervention, all patients had tables and water by day 2, supporting their comfort, hydration and independence.

An audit of call bell logs from March to July 2025 confirmed all call bells were in working order. However, while the call bells were functional, many were not within reach of patients. We spoke with 2 patients who were in unobservable bed spaces from the nurses’ station in majors. Both patients required mobility assistance and told us they would have to shout for help if they needed it. The service acted by introducing a nurse in charge checklist which included twice daily checks on call bell accessibility. While this supported positive change for patients, the long-term effectiveness of this required further monitoring, to ensure it remained a consistent change.

Staff described how they responded to changing risks by moving unwell patients to a designated area in major’s that allowed for continuous monitoring. Staff told us they would set alarms on monitoring equipment to signal when a patient’s vital signs were out of range, ensuring they could provide immediate attention.

Description: We care about and promote the wellbeing of our staff, and we support and enable them to always deliver person centred care.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

Some staff reported the rapid pace of change in the department and the intensity of working at high demand, were impacting on their sense of wellbeing. The frequent changes associated with the Unscheduled Care Transformation Program meant clinical areas were moved 3 times. While staff members described leaders as visible and supportive, some reported they did not feel involved in these changes. The trust were able to provide evidence of engagement and communication with staff, relating to the major change programme in the department. However, they recognised the importance of continuous strengthened communications with the team.

The 2025 NHS Staff Survey for the Unscheduled Care Team at Basingstoke revealed staff felt significantly more negative about their working lives than staff across the rest of the trust. This negative perception was notable across key areas of the NHS People Promise, particularly in themes related to feeling safe and healthy, receiving adequate reward and recognition, and overall team morale.

Leaders acknowledged the impact and challenges staff faced during the ongoing transformation. They continued to reflect on and review how to better balance the pace of change whilst maintaining the momentum required to meet patient needs. The department was working to strengthen communication with staff. For example, staff were invited to provide input for the next phase of the emergency service floor plan changes. And Acute Assessment Unit staffing levels remained under review until the unit’s new working methods were fully embedded.

The service had a clear well-being communication plan and various initiatives were available to support the mental and physical health of staff. For example, a series of staff fairs and events were rolled out throughout the year, and staff were supported by a well-being champion and a mental health first aider. Staff had access to the Mental Health Hub, which provided free, confidential clinical assessments, referrals to local services, and self-help resources for those struggling with stress or difficult shifts, including incidents involving violence or aggression.

During our inspection, some staff experienced a traumatic event, and we saw how the service took immediate action to care for staff and support their well-being. A psychology team provided support and a debrief was promptly conducted to allow staff a safe space to share experiences. A Pets as Therapy (PAT) dog was made available to provide comfort, demonstrating a holistic approach to staff care during a difficult time.