Glenfield 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

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.

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

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 4. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity at all times. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed very positive, compassionate care by all staff throughout the inspection Patients felt they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. Patients felt staff listened to them and communicated appropriately and in a way they could understand. Overall, we saw a compassionate, confident, calm and highly competent medical care staff.

During our observations, we found patients were cared for in a clean and well-maintained environment. Patients appeared well presented, appropriately dressed and their privacy and dignity were protected by suitable clothing, bedding and screening where required. People looked well-groomed and comfortable, and we did not observe any concerns relating to personal care or hygiene. Clinical areas were calm and orderly, with no unpleasant odours noted during our visit. The atmosphere on the wards was generally very peaceful and conducive to patient comfort and wellbeing.

Staff took great care to understand patients’ preferences and wishes. Staff responded quickly and efficiently to patients’ needs, especially if they were in pain, discomfort, or distress. Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. Call bells were answered very promptly during our visit.

One patient told us that “it’s like being in a private hospital” and “nothing is too much” when asking for things. Patients’ privacy and dignity was respected and upheld. Patients expressed confidence in staff, saying staff were always available even during busy periods and responded quickly to their needs.

One person told us, “I feel safe and looked after, they are always checking in on me and asking if I am okay”.

Staff were very discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it. Staff directed patients to other services when appropriate and, if required, supported them to access those services.

We carried out a Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI 2) on Ward 15 during the inspection and saw that all staff interactions with the patients were positive and compassionate. SOFI 2 is a nationally accredited tool for assessing the quality of staff and patient interactions.

Friends and Family Test (FFT) feedback in January 2026 was 95% positive for all medical care wards at the hospital. FFT feedback was consistently positive over time.

Staff were confident to raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients to protect people from abuse and support their wellbeing.

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 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 good communication skills and adapted their approach to meet individual needs, ensuring information was accessible to all. Staff ensured that patients could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights and how to complain. The information was available in different formats to meet people’s individual communication styles, including easy formats and different languages. Staff understood the individual needs of patients, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs.

Managers ensured that staff and patients had easy access to interpreters or used the language skills of staff that spoke multiple languages on site. One person told us “My English is not very good and they know this, so always get an interpreter when they are explaining something to me. I do have family, but they are always too busy, so this really helps”.

Patients had a choice of food to meet their dietary, religious and ethnic requirements. People were generally positive about their meals however some people consistently told us they had limited choice.

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 service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. People were supported to understand their rights. Their understanding was reviewed throughout their care and treatment, and we saw this during our inspection. Two consultants demonstrated great care when speaking to a patient who needed support from the trust’s interpreter service.

People were supported to maintain relationships and networks that were important to them. We observed carers and families were allowed to visit patients at the designated times. Therefore, patients had access to their friends and family while they were in hospital. We saw that Ward 20 was able to flex visiting times dependant on peoples’ needs.

People had access to activities and the local community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing. For example, Wards 16 and 17 had access to a well-furnished garden area in which people were able to go outside. The local community had also donated decorative items to the garden.

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 3. 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.

People’s needs, views, wishes and comfort were a priority and staff quickly anticipated these to avoid any preventable discomfort, concern or distress. Staff were aware of and dealt with any specific risk issues, such as falls or pressure ulcers and planned for these accordingly. For example, people who were from care settings were checked for pressure areas, that they had been recently fed and hydrated. Staff were alerted to people’s needs and took time to observe, communicated and engaged people in discussions about their immediate needs. They found out how to respond in the most appropriate way to respect their wishes. We saw staff talking to patients on the ward, engaging in friendly and personable conversations with the patients. One patient told us that staff would routinely “come and sit for a chat” and offer company. Staff quickly recognised when people needed urgent help or support and used appropriate tools and technology to assist. Ward leaders were clearly visible on the wards and engaged with patients.

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 3. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centered care.

People received safe, effective and person-centred care as the provider recognised and met the needs of staff. These included the necessary resource and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff had regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences. If necessary, leaders provided a timely and considered response. Staff confirmed this and said leaders gave support and listened to concerns to take actions.

People’s experience of a service was driven by a culture that normalised wellbeing through inclusivity, active listening, and open conversations. This enabled staff to do their job well and to be well. Staff said that their managers were “amazing” and felt they could question managers on any topic. Staff felt supported if they were struggling at work. This had a positive impact on the care they delivered to patients. Staff had easy access to personalised support that recognised the diversity of the workforce with support available to respect individual needs.

People were supported by staff who felt valued by their leaders and their colleagues. They had a genuine sense of belonging and the ability to contribute to decision making. Nursing staff said that they felt they could easily question medical staffs’ decisions on patient care and be listened to with respect. Likewise, medical staff told us that they could also approach the nursing staff for any support required

Staff and leaders told us that they felt their hospital was “the place to work” and chose to come to Glenfield Hospital. Staff said, ‘this hospital has a real family feel’. The service’s staff sickness and absence were similar to the average for the provider.

The provider recognised staff success within the service for example, with trust wide awards.

Staff appraisals were at 90% completion rate across the service. Appraisals included conversations about career development and how it could be supported.

Staff survey results for the service were complied for each ward and clinical area and themes used to help drive improvements. Each area had an action plan and included improvement actions such as more frequent meetings, accessing appropriate wellbeing support and time out days. Most staff said they were able to take breaks when needed, although this varied depending on how busy the service was.