Northampton General Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. Good: This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

The service was responsive and care was organised around the needs of birthing women. Women accessed services through a range of referral pathways and received timely care. Staff adapted care to meet individual preferences, including choice of birth setting. For example, birthing women were supported to make decisions about home birth, midwife-led units or hospital birth, which helped them feel confident and in control. Continuity of care was maintained across community and hospital services.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

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

Description: We make sure people are at the centre of their care and treatment choices and we decide, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The service was responsive and care was organised around the needs of birthing women. Women accessed services through a range of referral pathways and received timely care. Staff adapted care to meet individual preferences, including choice of birth setting. Birthing women were supported to make decisions about home birth, midwife-led units or hospital birth, which helped them to feel confident and in control. Continuity of care was maintained across community and hospital services. We saw excellent clinical care being provided with responsive plans being made and implemented by all members of the midwifery and obstetric team. Women were listened to and actively involved in decisions about their care. The partner of one woman said, “This is my second child here and we felt much more confident making decisions this time because the team really listened to what we wanted and supported our choices.” Staff knew the importance of tailoring care to the individual, ensuring each woman’s needs and preferences were understood and respected. Staff adapted care plans to reflect women’s wishes, cultural needs, and personal circumstances, providing continuity and reassurance throughout pregnancy and labour.

Listening to women and partners was embedded, including during emotionally challenging experiences such as bereavement. We discreetly observed a family, who after experiencing the loss of their baby, was treated with compassion and dignity. The baby was transferred sensitively, and staff provided ongoing emotional support to the parents, ensuring their wishes were respected at all times. This demonstrated a compassionate approach during distressing events.

Staff supported women through complex journeys, including those involving local authority processes and safeguarding. One woman described how she was supported by staff advocating on her behalf and ensuring her voice was heard. Staff worked collaboratively with partner agencies while maintaining a supportive, non‑judgemental approach, which helped the woman feel reassured and involved in decisions about her care.

Staff ensured women were empowered to make informed decisions by providing clear information, encouraging open dialogue, and respecting choices. This ensured women had a positive experience, with women and their partners feeling supported, heard, and in control of care and treatment throughout their journey.

The 2025 NHS maternity survey invited 300 service users to comment on the services at Northampton General Hospital, and 129 (44%) responses were received. Findings were most positive for antenatal care. Areas for improvement included care on the ward, labour and birth, and postnatal care. The service reviewed these findings and used them to inform ongoing quality improvement and support the delivery of safe, person‑centred care.

Feedback from women and partners about their experience with staff was positive. Birthing women reported that they were treated with dignity and respect. One woman said, “Staff always took the time to listen and treated me with kindness.” Our observations supported this. Staff responded promptly to requests and engaged with women in a supportive and professional manner. All interactions were warm and person‑centred. During the inspection, we observed staff maintaining eye contact, offering reassurance to anxious women, and providing practical assistance.

Compassionate, person‑centred care was embedded. Staff were welcoming and engaged positively with women and their partners, supporting informed choice through clinics and care discussions. Feedback and women’s experiences was used to inform service development. Bereavement care was a particular strength, with a seven-day service in place. Leaders recognised the importance of workforce sustainability in this area.

Description: We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

We noted the excellent Antenatal Screening and Fetal Medicine service. We noted the highly effective Perinatal Mental Health Midwife service. We noted the holistic approach demonstrated by the Transitional Care Unit. The transitional care (TC) service was in place and was undertaking quality improvement to minimise separation of parents and their babies. Vaccination uptake remained steady with NGH showing strong Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and pertussis acceptance supported by expanded community clinics. NGH showed detailed February 2026 uptake trends for pertussis and flu, with pertussis acceptance at 62.32% and RSV acceptance at 89.74%. Flu vaccine volumes were tracked monthly. NGH highlighted improved accessibility through three community clinics, supporting higher maternal and BCG vaccination rates while reducing hospital burden and mitigating space and location challenges.

The redesign of care models and pathways at NGH was progressing with several pathway redesign initiatives aimed at reducing operational strain and creating more predictable staffing patterns. These included Induction of Labour (IOL) pathway improvements, supported by regional NHSE teams, addressing known delays and inconsistencies. These improvements aimed to optimise flow and reduce unnecessary variability, which in turn decreases staffing pressure.

Description: We provide appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailor to individual needs.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The service had effective information governance arrangements. Electronic maternity records were secure, password protected and only accessible to authorised staff. Birthing women could access their records. The system supported clear documentation, reliable risk flagging and gave leaders real-time oversight to identify and respond to concerns. Data, themes and trends across maternity pathways were monitored, improving the quality and visibility of information.

The service complied with the Accessible Information Standard. This standard legally requires all healthcare providers to identify, record, flag, share, and meet the information and communication needs of people who have a disability, impairment, or sensory loss. Women and their partners were given information about their care, local support services, their rights and how to raise concerns. Information was available in a range of languages, which we saw during the assessment, along with accessible formats including easy-read materials. Additional support was available through the trust website. We saw information clearly displayed across maternity services, including posters and leaflets that helped women and their partners easily access key guidance and support information. Feedback from women was encouraged and discussed during handovers and meetings to support learning and improvement.

Women and their partners told us they felt informed throughout their maternity journey. Staff took time to discuss individual needs, health and wellbeing and referred women to appropriate services when needed. Online systems enabled women to manage appointments and view personalised care plans. Community consultations provided opportunities to review plans, discuss risks and understand care pathways.

Governance arrangements were well established. The service reported to external bodies, including MBRRACE-UK (Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the United Kingdom) and NHS England, ensuring national reporting requirements, safety surveillance and performance oversight were met.

Staff acted in a way that maintained trust and upheld professional standards. Most women felt comfortable asking questions and felt listened to in daily interactions. Women’s voices were heard and their opinions mattered. One woman described how staff listened to her concerns and took proactive steps to address them. Feedback about staff responsiveness was positive, contributing to women and their partners feeling safe and well supported.

We observed that women’s privacy and dignity were respected and maintained. Staff ensured bedside curtains were fully closed during examinations and personal care tasks, creating a private environment within shared ward areas.

Description: We make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. We involve them in decisions about their care and tell them what’s changed as a result.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Leaders and staff in maternity service listened to birthing women and their partners through patient experience engagement and feedback, this informed how concerns were understood and addressed. Between May 2025 and March 2026, 31 complaints had been investigated, most relating to clinical treatment and communication, with some delays identified in responses. A complaints policy was in place, and findings from investigations were used to develop action plans and drive improvements. We saw posters informing women how to raise concerns via the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS), and feedback from the patient experience team confirmed that women were aware of how to make a complaint. Women received feedback following complaints, and learning was shared through meetings and quality improvement initiatives. Staff understood how to manage complaints and how to direct women to the correct processes. Leaders followed the complaints process and ensured concerns were investigated and learning was shared.

We noted the findings of the 6-month review of birth partners staying overnight- patients survey in 2025 which really captured the wishes of women. This was a proactive survey to help adapt the service to meet the wishes of women. Staff also received feedback to support improvements in practice, including learning from complaints and positive feedback such as compliments and thank-you messages.

Staff supported a woman who requested a vaginal breech birth after another trust declined. Staff listened and supported her choice. This showed a person-centred approach.

Description: We make sure that everyone can access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Maternity services had provided inclusive, equitable and tailored care. Birthing women accessed services through self-referral, GP referral, emergency care and community midwifery, supporting early access. Feedback from women and partners had been used to improve access and service delivery. Bookings ranged from 349 to 450 per month, mostly face to face, with 70% to 80% completed by 10 weeks, meeting or close to the 75% target. Women presenting through emergency pathways were assessed on or soon after arrival and reviewed promptly by midwives, obstetricians and doctors. Where delays occurred, these were identified, reviewed and shared widely across the service to support learning and improvement beyond quality improvement meetings. This had improved since the last inspection.

Across Northamptonshire, countywide plans for community midwifery were being developed to improve both the accessibility and quality of maternity care. NGH was proactively working to deliver a Community Midwifery Transformation redesign in Northamptonshire. The central aim was to ensure that all expectant mothers received equitable provision, regardless of location. The Trust was currently in the early stages of planning the evolution of these services, with both Trusts collaborating to align and embed new approaches. NGH were collaborating with NHSE Maternity Improvement Advisors, to support alignment of community services.

Access and flow were monitored, with term admissions between 2.7% and 5.2% and minimal unit closures, ensuring services remained available. Staff made reasonable adjustments for individual needs, including cultural preferences, communication needs and choice of birth setting. Teams worked across community, hospital and emergency care to support continuity, with medical cover available day and night.

Bereavement support was accessible seven days a week, including out of hours. Staff worked with multidisciplinary teams, hospitals, coroners and medical examiners to ensure coordinated and timely care. Women and families could choose the level and type of support, including follow up or face to face care. Workforce challenges were recognised and leaders actively sought to maintain continuity of staffing levels. Staff were supported by managers to provide ongoing care.

Plans were in place to improve bereavement experience through a dedicated suite, in response to feedback and supported by fundraising and organisational investment. The Daisy Project supported improvements to rooms and partner facilities, with leadership committed to continued development.

We spoke with women who told us they could self-refer and access care easily. One birthing woman waiting for discharge said she had been appropriately referred to mental health teams and described her care as a positive experience for her and her partner.

Discharge was planned and improved using feedback. Information and timeliness were clearer, and data such as readmissions within 28 days was reviewed to support learning and continuity of care.

The service averaged 3 complaints per month in the period April 2026 to February 2026. Robust complaint resolution process was in place.

Description: We actively seek out and listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. We tailor the care, support and treatment in response to this.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

An inclusive culture was evident, with environments reflecting local diversity. Leaders and staff understood local needs and worked with system partners to improve access, responsiveness and reduce inequalities, improving outcomes and experiences for birthing women.

Leaders recognised further improvement was needed and described a clear, ongoing focus on equity, experience and outcomes, supported by partnership working and continuous review. They recognised risks linked to deprivation, ethnicity, digital poverty, rurality, sensory needs and estate limitations. Although the ageing environment restricted some changes, staff made practical adjustments to reduce barriers and improve access.

Audits showed environmental factors such as noise, visual clutter, unpredictable spaces and poor communication could affect some women’s ability to understand information and make an informed choice. In response, the service reduced stimuli, improved signage and lighting, managed noise and created quieter spaces. Waiting areas were improved to support calm, predictable environments.

Support for women experiencing digital poverty was strengthened. Clear information was available across referral and triage pathways. Women felt informed, confident and supported, with rights and choices clearly explained.

Community midwives monitored maternal and perinatal outcomes and supported women with additional needs. They worked with safeguarding teams and partners to deliver coordinated care, identify risks early and enable timely intervention. Staff valued training in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

Actions to reduce inequalities included continuity of carer, culturally appropriate support and personalised care planning. Wider work addressed workforce, estates and service configuration. Accessible feedback systems, including translation tools, enabled women from diverse communities to share experiences. Women reported positive experiences, feeling respected and supported, with individual needs understood.

Quality improvement processes were embedded. Audits reviewed access, communication, decision-making, consent and continuity, identifying variation and supporting improvement. Partnership working with the Maternity and Neonatal Voices Partnership supported co-produced improvements, with clear actions and oversight.

Governance processes were effective. Leaders reviewed patient experience data, including by ethnicity, to monitor inequalities and track progress. Equality impact assessments supported inclusive decision-making. Maternity bereavement rooms were compliant with the Fuller Inquiry recommendations.

Across both UHN sites, the vast majority of births occurred within the White ethnic group, with NGH recording slightly higher number than the other trust. Small numbers of births were recorded among African and Asian or Asian British families at both sites, with NGH again reporting marginally higher activity. Very low numbers appeared in the Mixed category, and a small proportion of records were classified as Not Stated. The distribution reflects the population profile of the local maternity service, and the pattern was broadly similar across both hospitals, with no major disparities between sites except for overall activity volume.

Description: We support people to plan for important life changes, so they can have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff across maternity services, supported birthing women to make informed decisions about their care and treatment in a compassionate, respectful, and person-centred way throughout their maternity journey. We observed positive, respectful interactions in the labour suite and community hub where midwives and obstetricians worked collaboratively to explain care and treatment options, answer questions, and involve women and their partners in decision‑making.

Continuity of care provided by community midwives enabled women to feel known, listened to, and supported both prior to admission and during transitions between services. Community and hospital-based staff worked effectively together to share information, maintain personalised care plans, and ensure these were regularly reviewed and adapted in response to changing needs.

Care for birthing women and families requiring additional emotional or practical support was delivered sensitively and with dignity. Bereavement support was prioritised, and staff described how they supported women and their partners for as long as possible within NGH maternity services, ensuring privacy, continuity, and compassionate care at all times.

We observed effective multidisciplinary collaboration between community midwives, ward-based midwives, obstetricians, safeguarding teams, bereavement services, and other relevant professionals to plan and deliver care for women with complex or additional needs. This coordinated approach supported the delivery of safe, personalised care and helped ensure that women and their partners felt supported, particularly during emotionally challenging experiences.

Community midwives shared examples of supporting women in the community who were experiencing significant or complex difficulties, including safeguarding concerns. Staff described how they sought timely advice and guidance from safeguarding leads and worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure women and families were appropriately supported and protected. This demonstrated a proactive and responsive approach to safeguarding, with a clear focus on the wellbeing and safety of both mother and baby.

The Perinatal Single Improvement Plan had been launched to drive collaborative improvement across UHN, with a focus on workforce planning, organisational design, and staff equity.