St Andrews Healthcare Northampton

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

All staff we spoke with at all levels were aware of their roles and responsibilities. There were systems in place to ensure staff received supervision and training. There was a hospital wide induction offered to all non-substantive staff members. There were appropriate incident management policies and processes in place which staff followed on a day-to-day basis. Records and patient information were held securely. Staff notified the Local Authority and CQC of reportable incidents.

This service scored 75 (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 Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

All staff we spoke with were aware of their roles and responsibilities. Senior staff investigated any staff related concerns with appropriate support from human resources. Additional support was provided to staff, in the form of supervision or additional training if this was identified as an issue. There were also opportunities for staff to attend reflective practice sessions. Staff submitted relevant statutory notifications to relevant, external bodies as expected. All staff knew the importance of maintaining confidential records securely. Senior staff attended regular divisional governance meetings to monitor ongoing risks within the service. Information was cascaded to staff on the ward.

There were clear systems in place to support appropriate incident management, including learning from incidents. Registered staff were able to articulate some learning from events, whereas some unregistered staff could not. This suggests that the learning from lessons process could be strengthened. Senior staff continued to monitor staffing and had over recruited on this ward. Despite this, a high volume of bank and agency staff had been used to meet the needs of the young people. Where possible, the provider strived to use staff who knew the ward and the young people. The hospital had a standard induction for bank and agency staff, which was a general induction to the hospital, not specific to the different patient groups. Ward staff had a process whereby bank and agency staff new to the ward and / or working with children and adolescents, would receive a tour of the ward, a detailed handover of current young people, and had access to a folder which outlined individual information about each young person. Some concerns had been raised by patients regarding staff not consistently undertaking observations as they should. This had been recognised by staff and audits of observations were being undertaken to highlight any deficits.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.