University College Hospital & Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Wing

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

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

People were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. Their privacy and dignity was respected. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. They involved people to make decisions about their care. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. The service had several initiatives to promote the wellbeing of their staff. Staff felt the service supported and enabled them to deliver person-centred care.

At our last inspection we rated this key question Good at this assessment the rating remained the Good. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

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.

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.

All the patients we met said staff treated them well. Patients were able to maintain their dignity as much as possible, and staff were kind and acted with respect in interactions we observed. One patient told us they had a “really good experience.” They said they were, “Grateful to all the staff.”

Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. One patient said they “felt safe in the ED” and “they were involved with the care given”. We saw the 2024 Urgent and Emergency Care Survey results provided by the service. Patients gave consistently positive feedback about kindness, compassion and respect shown by staff. Survey results showed the trust performed better than expected for interactions with doctors and nurses, including staff listening to patients, explaining care clearly and involving them in decisions. Patients reported that staff took time to understand their needs and discuss any anxieties or fears, reflecting a caring and person-centred approach. However, some patients reported that family members or carers did not always have enough opportunity to speak with staff.

Patients’ overall experience reflected positive caring relationships and a supportive environment. Survey findings showed the service performed better than expected overall, and patients said staff communicated clearly, helped manage pain and provided support during their time in ED. This indicated that people generally felt safe, reassured and well cared for; however, some feedback highlighted gaps in communication about next steps and delays during busy periods, which impacted the consistency of patient experience.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

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 responded promptly to patients’ immediate needs and provided supportive and compassionate care. Patients were warmly welcomed on arrival, and staff introduced themselves clearly, helping to establish trust and reassurance. Patients told us they were offered food and drinks, with regular trolley rounds and additional support from volunteers. Basic care needs, including comfort, hydration and nutrition, were consistently met, and patients were positive about the support they received.

Patients’ privacy and dignity was maintained when responding to their needs. Care and treatment were delivered in private areas, and we observed that conversations could not be overheard. Chaperones were offered for sensitive examinations, and information about this service was clearly displayed, which helped to support patients to feel safe and respected; however, not all patients we spoke with were fully aware of the availability of the chaperone service.

Patients felt able to seek help and had confidence staff would respond appropriately. Patients told us they knew who to approach if they needed assistance or had concerns, and staff were visible and approachable. This supported patients to feel reassured and that their needs would be met in a timely way.

The trust cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Leaders demonstrated that they prioritised staff wellbeing and created an environment which supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care. They had a detailed and structured approach to wellbeing through a wide range of actions aligned to national frameworks, including the trust-wide wellbeing programme. This was developed in response to staff feedback and continuously refined through engagement and data analysis.

Leaders used multiple sources of workforce intelligence, including staff surveys, real-time feedback, and engagement platforms, to monitor staff experience and shape wellbeing activities. Staff survey participation in 2025 improved significantly, with response rates increasing by 14% to 54%, which was above the England average. Survey results consistently placed the organisation in line with the best-performing trusts in England, and it was rated as the best acute/community trust for “recommended place to work” for 4 consecutive years.

Leaders embedded wellbeing into everyday practice and promoted a positive, inclusive, and supportive working culture. We observed staff working well together. Staff we spoke with described strong team working and respectful day-to-day interactions. Regular team meetings, huddles, and local engagement forums enabled staff to check in with one another, raise concerns, and contribute to service improvements.

The service provided a broad range of accessible wellbeing support to meet diverse staff needs. This included psychological support services, staff networks, wellbeing resources, and practical support such as financial advice and cost-of-living initiatives. A network of over 300 wellbeing champions ensured support was available locally across all divisions and acted as a two-way feedback mechanism between staff and corporate services. Staff networks were well established, with nearly 3,500 members, providing peer support, promoting inclusion, and strengthening staff voice across a wide range of equality and wellbeing themes.

Leaders supported staff engagement, development, and recognition through a range of initiatives. Workforce strategies and service developments were co-produced with staff through workshops, forums, and surveys, with over 900 staff and patients participating in strategy engagement activities. Recognition, such as staff awards, received high levels of engagement, with 1,486 nominations, reflecting a positive and appreciative culture. Leaders also supported staff through training, leadership development, and flexible engagement methods, including digital platforms and regular communications.

However, while leaders had set up a detailed wellbeing offer, they recognised that engagement and access varied across staff groups. Some staff experienced barriers to participation due to competing demands and limited protected time. Leaders acknowledged the need to continue improving communication, accessibility, and the long-term sustainability of wellbeing initiatives to ensure consistent reach and impact across the workforce.