Lincolnshire Community Health Services NHS Trust

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good, this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients were seen as individuals, and their care was personal to them and well-coordinated. Staff encouraged patients to be involved in their care, so their individual needs and preferences were central to the care that was provided.

We observed compassionate and meaningful interactions between staff, patients and their families/careers. Through conversations with the staff team, it was evident that the staff knew their patients and their families well and were aware of their care preferences.

We reviewed 15 patients care and treatment plans across the 5 end of life services. Although the information within the care plans was accurate, unfortunately they did not show how the patient and their families had been involved. We found little to no personalisation which the Trust and the staff teams were aware of. A staff member told us, “It’s a shame because we do very good work with patients and their families but due to the system and the ways that the care plans are created it is difficult to add this information.”

Risks related to the lack of information were managed due to the services using regular staff members who knew the patients well and their care needs. It was noted that it would potentially be difficult for a staff member with no knowledge of the patient to work effectively following the existing quality and format or the care plans.

The Trust did tell us that they acknowledged that the current care plan templates within the electronic care system did not fully support the level of personalisation required for truly individualised patient care. The templates relied heavily on pre-populated text, which limited the ability of staff to record meaningful, patient-centred updates. The services held weekly and monthly audits, alongside patient feedback to highlight the care is being tailored towards individual needs, even if this was not always fully captured within the electronic documentation.

Patient care was effectively coordinated, with the service and its partners working collaboratively alongside patients and their families. They were actively involved in discussions and decisions regarding future care arrangements, including potential transfers to other providers. This inclusive approach provided reassurance and supported continuity of care.

With the consent of patients and their families, the service invited external care partners to participate in all care and treatment reviews. Comprehensive assessments were carried out to determine eligibility for proposed services, ensuring future needs could be appropriately met.

Partners were encouraged and supported to take an active role in the patient’s care, treatment, and support. Their collaborative involvement had a positive impact on patient outcomes, particularly during discharge planning whether returning home or transitioning to an alternative care provider to continue treatment.

Established systems and processes ensured people could access the service at times and locations that suited them. Managers demonstrated an understanding of the diverse health and care needs of individuals and took proactive steps to address these.

The service had effective systems in place to tailor communication according to individual needs and preferences. Staff made use of available resources to deliver information and, when necessary, referred patients to external communication services to ensure that all information was accessible and understood.

Patients received clear, accurate, and up-to-date information about their care and treatment in a way they could understand. Where needed, information was made available in various formats to support both patients and their families.

Patients and their families were aware of how to raise complaints and welcomed by the service to share any feedback. Staff shared that this was usually shared in person to staff members who were normally able to address any concerns immediately. Patients and their families were also given the opportunity to formally log a complaint in writing, for which they would receive a response in writing. We found that there have been no end-of-life related complaints received within the month of August 2025 for any of the community hospital wards or The Butterfly hospice.

Processes supported the effective sharing of information, with additional support provided for patients and families who had specific communication needs. For example, interpreter services were offered to overcome language barriers, and information was available in multiple languages, large print, and easy-read formats.

All information was handled in accordance with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) guidelines, ensuring confidentiality and data protection.

Clear information was displayed throughout the service explaining how individuals could provide feedback about their care or raise a complaint. Contact details for external organisations were also made available, offering additional avenues for support. To assist patients and families with communication needs, details about advocacy and interpreter services were prominently displayed.

Patients were aware of how to share feedback and were actively encouraged and supported to do so. They felt comfortable speaking with the nurse in charge or the ward manager when needed, and staff facilitated these conversations with sensitivity and respect.

Staff consistently promoted an open culture, encouraging patients and their families to raise concerns or share feedback. All feedback and complaints were acknowledged and investigated promptly, with outcomes communicated to the individual who raised the issue. The service viewed complaints and concerns as valuable opportunities for learning and improvement.

The complaints process was efficient, ensuring timely acknowledgment, thorough investigation, and clear communication of outcomes within agreed timeframes. Managers shared learning from complaints with staff to enhance clinical practice and improve patient outcomes. A review of several concerns confirmed that each was addressed appropriately and in a timely manner, with relevant information and outcomes provided to those who raised them.

An external professional told us, “Patient and relative experience is valued, and patient stories are shared within the staff team monthly.”

Patients accessed the service through referrals from hospitals, GPs, or district nurses. The service was open and accessible not only to patients but also to their families, carers, and individuals experiencing bereavement or who had been bereaved.

To ensure accessibility for all those assessed as needing care and treatment, the service worked closely with external organisations. This included collaboration with disability specialists to enhance the physical accessibility of the premises, and with learning disability organisations to improve the experience for patients with learning disabilities.

Care was delivered in a way that was responsive to individual needs, promoted equality, and was accessible to all. This included support for people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act, those nearing the end of life, and individuals in vulnerable circumstances or with complex needs.

Feedback provided to the Trust from a patient included, “The healthcare workers, nurses and doctors were amazing with support and information. Everyone did their jobs exceptionally well and listened to me.”

Patients were supported to overcome potential barriers to accessing care and treatment. They had access to services that enabled effective communication, ensuring their voices were heard, their needs understood, and their feedback captured.

The service facilitated access to independent interpreters and advocacy services to ensure patients, and their families could express themselves and be actively involved in their care. These resources helped ensure that feedback was not only gathered but acted upon. To further support patients with communication needs, the service maintained strong links with independent organisations specialising in communication support. Additionally, the service participated in collaborative benchmarking initiatives with nationally recognised bodies to evaluate standards, monitor performance, and drive continuous improvement across relevant sectors.

Feedback provided to the Trust from a patient included, “I felt very sale and well cared for throughout my stay. I was always aware of my plan and every effort was made to make me feel comfortable.”

Patients and their families were actively involved in decisions regarding care, treatment, and discharge planning. The service was highly responsive in supporting individuals to engage with their religious beliefs and personal preferences, particularly at the end of life.

Processes were in place to help patients and families make informed decisions about care and treatment, including advance planning where appropriate. Documentation such as Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms were completed following consultation and in accordance with relevant guidance.

Staff worked closely with patients and their families to explore future care options, allowing sufficient time for thoughtful decision-making, including end-of-life considerations. The service provided palliative and end-of-life care at home in collaboration with GPs, hospital teams, and other care providers, tailored to the complexity of each patient’s needs.

Patients and their families were supported throughout their care journey, with guidance on treatment decisions and care planning. Where appropriate, the service facilitated advanced care planning to ensure that individual preferences and needs were respected.