SpaMedica Gloucester

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

We assessed 3 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the score for these areas with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. We found the provider used processes to monitor and support managers and staff. However, staff experience of support and inclusiveness was variable at times.

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.

Staff felt they were part of a supportive team and that the hospital performed well for patients. Staff experience of support was variable. Some staff had been well supported by managers when they had needed additional help. For example, in adjusting working hours. However, not all staff felt their skills and experience were recognised and valued by more senior managers. Some improvement suggestions had taken a long time to receive managers’ responses. Some staff had experienced negative feedback when raising concerns and when using their experience and skills to promote improvements.

Managers used established processes to include and encourage staff to comment on the running of the hospital. Executive leaders reviewed hospital performance and additional training was provided for staff to develop their skills. Managers used appraisal processes to identify where staff would benefit from support. Regional managers reviewed all activities of the hospital and identified where they could offer support. Executive leaders reviewed the information and provided support for hospital and regional managers.

Most staff were happy to access and raise concerns with managers and felt involved and included. However, some staff had experienced difficulties in speaking up. Some staff had felt unsupported by managers and corporate services when raising concerns and had not received responses to their concerns. Managers told us the wider corporate team had a person in the role of freedom to speak up guardian. However, most staff were unaware the role existed. There were plans to relaunch the Freedom to Speak Up service within the organisation in September 2024, which included staff training.

Managers used processes to include staff and encourage them to provide comment. There were policies which clearly articulated how staff could raise concerns with their line manager and how to escalate further. Annual staff surveys provided information for managers and executive team leaders about how staff were feeling and willingness to speak up. The action plan from the previous year’s staff survey had been regularly reviewed by managers who consulted with staff about its progress. Other measures to monitor staff morale included staff turnover and exit interviews. Staff turnover had remained lower than the target and had not flagged any concerns.

Leaders encouraged an inclusive culture within the workplace. However, staff experience of feeling involved and fairly treated was variable. Some staff felt involved in actions for improvement. Workplace adjustments had been made which supported staff to undertake their roles. However, some staff felt they had experienced unfair treatment and were hesitant to contribute their opinion as a consequence. Recent adaptions to workspace had created room for staff who needed to use the facilities occasionally by ‘hot desking’. This had been created in response to staff suggestion but it was not clear staff had been made aware of this.

Processes promoted inclusivity and the service was open to all. The service considered equality, diversity and inclusion when it drafted, published and reviewed its policies. Managers were knowledgeable about the policies and how to implement them. A range of communication methods were used to communicate opportunities for staff to develop in their roles.

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

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.