Bluebell Wood Children's Hospice

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We did not assess enough quality statements to re-rate effective, but the two we did were good. This meant the key question of effective is still rated as RI. We assessed two quality statements relating to how staff, teams and services work together, and monitoring and improving outcomes; The hospice coordinated, collaborated and shared information about children with partner organisations where appropriate. The hospice routinely collected and monitored information about people’s care and treatment outcomes. However, staff could not always ensure outcomes were positive and consistent.

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not assess this evidence category.

Staff were focused on a shared vision, and all helped identify people who may need extra support. For example, children could be identified by internal sources or staff such as physiotherapists, the family support team or external sources through multidisciplinary teams (MDT’s). Children in their last 12 months of life were identified through close working with partner agencies, as well as through in-depth care planning and advanced care planning arrangements. Staff members returning to the hospice from external roles, absence or maternity leave noted an increase in joined-up working aided by the hospice’s one-year strategic plan. As CQC’s inspection concluded, the department were recruiting for a care floor educator role amalgamated with nursing hours to build and foster stronger working relations between the care and education teams. However, many staff including 66.6% of care team respondents to CQC’s staff cultural survey fed back there could be more input, communication and working interest from trustees, as they never or rarely saw them interacting with services. CQC relayed this to senior leads to follow up as they felt appropriate. One lead felt this could be due to a lack of staff understanding about a trustee’s role. They cited the example of the current chief of trustees attending the hospice’s last two annual remembrance and bereavement day events for families onsite. The chair of trustees recognised as a board they needed to do more to be visible.

The hospice had link nurses who worked with their NHS counterparts to share good practice and research-based practice. The relevant staff maintained strong working relationships with all integrated care boards (ICBs) and the South Yorkshire children’s and young people’s (CYP) alliance. The service had work ongoing to create a partnership model to providing end of life care across the region.

Two care team staff fed back negatively about their induction. In response the new CSD was looking to streamline their induction e-learning for clinical staff to be more physically engaging and achieve the right balance.

The hospice offered holistic joined up care services for children and families. For example, counselling and bereavement support and music therapy ran consistently and without a waiting list for new referrals. The hospice had a dedicated transition coordinator and youth engagement worker focused solely on working with young people from the age of 14 years old. All services were completely free to families referred to the hospice. The discharging team coordinated all discharge planning and included all relevant MDT members. MDTs took place at the most convenient time for most professionals.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.