Gravesham Community Hospital

Updated 15 September 2022

Gravesham Community Hospital is one of four locations within the North Kent business unit under HCRG Care Services Limited, who are an independent healthcare provider with over 5,000 staff nationally working in partnership with the NHS and local authorities. After more than 10 years as part of the Virgin Group, Virgin Care rebranded as HCRG Care Services Limited in 2021 and was acquired by Twenty20 Capital.

Gravesham Community Hospital provides community adults services across the Dartford, Gravesham and Swanley boroughs in Kent, which align with the local Health and Care Partnership.

This location has not previously been inspected or rated.

This location provides the following core services:

• Community adult services
• Community inpatient service

Updated 15 September 2022

This was the first time we rated this service. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• Staff were not fully compliant with all mandatory training in key skills. The service used multiple IT systems to monitor and record compliance, which were not fully integrated meaning that performance figures for training were not always up to date.
• The ward environment at the Sapphire Unit was not entirely dementia friendly so patients admitted with a dementia diagnosis could not always orientate themselves.
• Community nursing teams did not always have easy to find care plans with patients.

Updated 15 September 2022

This was the first time we rated this service. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• The service should ensure that care planning documentation is provided to patients which is easy for patients to recognise and understand.
• Staff were not fully compliant with all mandatory training in key skills.

Updated 15 September 2022

This was the first time we rated this service. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
• The service controlled infection risk well. The service used systems and processes to administer and record medicines safely.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers. The patients we spoke with were happy with their care; one patient described the service as “first class”.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people and took account of patients’ individual needs. People could access the service when they needed it and received the right care in a timely way. It was easy for people to give feedback and patients we spoke to told us they felt confident to raise concerns about the care received.
• Leaders ran services well and staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care and clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• Staff were not fully compliant with all mandatory training in key skills.
• The ward environment was not entirely dementia friendly so patients admitted with a dementia diagnosis could not always orientate themselves.
• Staff told us they received one-to-one meetings with their managers on an ad-hoc basis, and clinical supervision was being carried out, although the frequency of supervision was inconsistent. Managers did not routinely record supervision with staff.