Archived: Precious Glimpse

Updated 24 August 2021

Precious Glimpse provides 2D, 3D, 4D, HD live and gender keep sake baby scans to self-paying women and their families. The service carries out trans abdominal ultrasound scans from week 7 to week 40. Appointments can be booked between 8.30am – 4.30pm Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. The ultrasound technician reviewed the woman’s details before carrying out the scan, they checked consent and confirmed the woman was aware the scan was for keep sake purposes and not to provide diagnostic screening. The clinic is based in Burnley town centre and is reachable by public transport. The premises had a waiting room, scanning room, storage area, office and toilet facilities.

We carried out an unannounced inspection on the service on 17 June 2021. We spoke to four staff members, observed and spoke with two women attending for scans and reviewed twelve records.

Updated 24 August 2021

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as requires improvement because:

Staff received training in key skills, however not all staff had completed mandatory training. We were not assured staff understood how to protect women from abuse, and managed safety well. There was lack of information relating to how the registered manager acted and recorded on risks to women. The service did not always manage safety incidents well and we found no evidence of learned lessons from them. Staff did not collect safety information to improve the service.

The registered manager did not monitor the effectiveness of the service and did not regularly review if staff were competent.

People could not always access the service when they needed it, the registered manager confirmed the service was open three days a week between 8.30-4.30pm. There were no evening appointments to accommodate women who worked. The service did not make it easy for people to give feedback, there was no evidence of how to make a complaint.

The service did not have a vision or values. There was a lack of governance processes to review performance and activity. Risks were not always identified, reviewed or mitigated. We found there was limited information to demonstrate how the service made improvements.

However:

The service-controlled infection risk well.

Staff treated women with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs.

The registered manager used reliable information systems. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. We found staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities and worked within their scope of practice.

Due to the concerns we found during our inspection we used our powers to take enforcement action. We served the provider with a Section 29 Warning Notice. This told the provider that they were failing to comply with Regulation 17 Good Governance.

The provider now has a specified time to make improvements to ensure compliance with the Regulations. We will revisit the service to check that appropriate action has been taken and that the quality of healthcare has improved.

Updated 24 August 2021

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as requires improvement because:

Staff received training in key skills, however not all staff had completed mandatory training. We were not assured staff understood how to protect women from abuse, and managed safety well. There was lack of information relating to how the registered manager acted and recorded on risks to women. The service did not always manage safety incidents well and we found no evidence of learned lessons from them. Staff did not collect safety information to improve the service.

The registered manager did not monitor the effectiveness of the service and did not regularly review if staff were competent.

People could not always access the service when they needed it, the registered manager confirmed the service was open three days a week between 8.30-4.30pm. There were no evening appointments to accommodate women who worked. The service did not make it easy for people to give feedback, there was no evidence of how to make a complaint.

The service did not have a vision or values. There was a lack of governance processes to review performance and activity. Risks were not always identified, reviewed or mitigated. We found there was limited information to demonstrate how the service made improvements.

However:

The service-controlled infection risk well.

Staff treated women with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs.

The registered manager used reliable information systems. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. We found staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities and worked within their scope of practice.