West End Donor Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Leaders and staff had a shared vision. Leaders were visible and knowledgeable. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There were clear systems of accountability and good governance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

Leaders have a shared vision, values and strategy that staff understood and supported. The vision, values and strategy had been developed through a structured planning process in collaboration with people who used the service, staff and external partners. The strategy document for 2022 to 2026 included the values of the organisation. Induction included training and understanding the core values, which were embedded into personal development and performance (PDPR) annual reviews and follow ups. All information including PDPR, values, policies on diversity and inclusion and HR contacts were easily accessed through the provider’s intranet.

Staff and leaders demonstrated a positive, compassionate, listening culture that promoted trust and understanding between themselves and people using the service. We observed an atmosphere that was friendly and supportive to people. People donating blood told us they had positive experiences donating blood. They told us they were listened to and their needs were understood. All staff we interacted with were engaging and friendly. Staff approached us to say hello and check that we had everything we needed. The organisation had an independent mediation team for conflict resolution. Managers told us this was a reasonably new initiative within NHSBT and had been running for around a year.

Staff at all levels understood equality, diversity and human rights, and prioritise safe, compassionate care. Core values included prioritising safe and compassionate care. They were also committed to promoting equality, diversity and human rights (EDHR), which were part of the mandatory training framework. The values of the service were embedded into the PDPR annual reviews, follow ups and promoted in how meetings were conducted. Staff completed conflict resolution training as part of their EDHR mandatory training. There was a 97% compliance rate for mandatory training.

Leaders had the experience, capacity and capability to ensure the service’s vision could be delivered. There were capable and experienced leaders who ensured risks were being managed and quality maintained. For instance, national leads supported the work of the service in areas such as safeguarding and infection control. There were national and local quality assurance teams who supported the work of the service by providing advice and guidance, and collected data to monitor quality and safety.

There were leadership structures supporting the work of the service, coordinating care and ensuring risks were being managed. There was a leadership structure within the service of donor-carer supervisors and nurses. Staff told us this provided a supportive structure. There was an area manager who directly oversaw functions and operations of the service. They reported to a national director who reported to executive managers.

We observed good organisation among staff, organised to specific tasks ensuring an effective service. For instance, donors were called for their appointments and escorted to the pod area and into the blood donation chair, a member of staff stocked up on consumables, while another was getting storage bags prepped and lined for blood product storage. This promoted effective working and minimised delays. We observed staff checking donor identity and assessment information prior to the procedure ensuring the correct donor was being taken to the pod.

Staff told us they felt supported by managers and received the training to enable them to do their job and progress their careers. We were told that annual appraisals included wellbeing check-ups and discussions about career progression. However, some staff told us managers were not always as visible as they would like, and rarely took part in team briefings but would sometimes support clinics when they were short of staff.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

There were effective governance arrangements to manage performance and risk. The board assurance framework demonstrated provider risks were being owned, assessed and mitigated. They were broken down into specified categories that included donor and patient safety, service disruption, staffing, regulatory compliance, transformational change and corporate governance.

Key quality metrics for the service were regularly gathered and reported on. We were provided with the December 2025 and January 2026’reports which demonstrated assurance and oversight. It reported on key performance and quality such as blood supply, external inspections, notifications to the registrant bodies MHRA and CQC, donor safety incidents and quality improvement initiatives following incidents. There was a monthly quality review meeting for the London donor centres which monitored key metrics such as quality improvement initiatives following incidents, complaints, audits, assessments, equipment, supplies, donor feedback and risk register. Minutes were accompanied by an action log which identified owner and updates for each action.

Performance and risk management at the service were supported by a quality assurance team based at a nearby donor centre. Their work was supported by a national quality assurance team for overall assurance. There was a national audit manager who set up programmes of audits to be conducted throughout the year. A ‘care quality key observation guide’ took place in December 2025. This was an overall check of quality and safety carried out by NHSBT’s national care quality team. The assessment incorporated quality checks including skills observations, hand hygiene, IPC protocol and safety checks. It identified areas of good practice and areas for improvement which were monitored by the quality assurance team. A ‘continual self-assessment’ was carried out quarterly and covered a range of quality indicators such as hygiene, storage, temperatures, stock, equipment, training, availability of documentation, emergency equipment check and environment. Managers worked alongside the quality assurance team to act on findings and monitor improvement.

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.