The New Foscote Hospital

Updated 24 August 2021

The New Foscote Hospital is operated by The New Foscote Hospital Limited. The hospital is based in Banbury, Oxfordshire. The hospital was first opened in 1981 and was known as The Foscote Hospital. In 2019 the hospital was bought by a family investment fund and became known as The New Foscote Hospital. Since the purchase the hospital has been undergoing a transformation process.

The New Foscote Hospital provides surgery, endoscopy, outpatients and diagnostic imaging services. The hospital provides care and treatment to adults who have private medical insurance, pay for themselves and NHS funded patients.

In the reporting period from June 2020 to May 2021:

• There were 1,767 surgery day cases and 256 inpatient episodes of care recorded at the hospital; of these 58% were privately/ insured funded patients and 42% NHS-funded.
• The endoscopy service was undertaking an average of 10 endoscopy procedures per week for patients over the age of 18 years.
• There were 10,151 outpatient total attendances; of these 64% were privately/ insured funded patients and 36% were NHS-funded.
• There were 1,007 physiotherapy attendances; of these 99% were privately/ insured funded patients and 1% were NHS-funded.
• The imaging service was undertaking an average of 24 plain film x-rays per month at the time of our visit. Ultrasound clinics were run mostly in the evenings and staff carried out approximately 120 scans per week; 80% were NHS patients and 20% were privately funded.

The hospital has 12 ensuite bedrooms, four-day case bays, one operating theatre and an endoscopy suite. There is an outpatient department with consulting and treatment rooms and a diagnostic imaging service offering plain film X-ray imaging and ultrasound. There are no emergency facilities at this hospital.

The hospital is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Diagnostic and Screening Procedures
• Surgical Procedures
• Family Planning
• Treatment of Disease, Disorder or Injury

The registered manager who has been in post since May 2020.

The hospital was previously inspected in 2016 when it was under different ownership and rated as good.

We inspected The New Foscote Hospital using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We first visited 8-9 January 2020 but were unable to complete the inspection process at that time. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic created a significant delay and we returned to the New Foscote Hospital on 16 June 2021.

The main service provided by this hospital was surgery. Where our findings on surgery for example, management arrangements – also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the surgery service level.

The outpatient summary includes outpatient clinics provided by the physiotherapy team and services offered by the diagnostic imaging service, which at the time of our inspection was limited to plain film x-ray imaging and an ultrasound service.

Updated 24 August 2021

We have not previously rated the service, although the service was inspected and rated as good in 2016, when it was under different ownership. 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 mostly controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They mostly managed medicines well. The service mostly 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, 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.

Updated 24 August 2021

We have not previously rated the service, although the service was inspected and rated as good in 2016, when it was under different ownership. We rated it as good because:

• The service provided training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. All areas within the clinic were clean and had suitable furnishings. The design, maintenance and use of facilities, premises and equipment kept people safe. Staff completed and updated risk assessments to remove or minimise risks. The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience. There was a system to report safety incidents and staff knew how to report incidents and near misses.
• 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, 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 and took account of their individual needs.
• 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 had the skills and abilities to run the service and were visible and approachable. There was a clear leadership structure from service level to senior management level. Staff were aware of the overall vision and strategy and felt part of the vision for the hospital. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. The service had an open culture where staff could raise concerns. Leaders operated effective governance processes. Leaders and teams used systems to manage performance effectively. The service collected reliable data and analysed it. The information systems were integrated and secure. Leaders and staff engaged well with colleagues. Staff were committed to continually learning and improving services.

Updated 24 August 2021

This service has not been rated previously. It was inspected and rated in 2016 but was then under different ownership. We rated it as good because:

• The service provided training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. All areas within the departments were clean and had suitable furnishings. The design, maintenance and use of facilities, premises and equipment mostly kept people safe. The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience. There was a system to report safety incidents and staff knew how to report incidents and near misses.
• 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, 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 and took account of their individual needs.
• 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 had the skills and abilities to run the service and were visible and approachable. There was a clear leadership structure from service level to senior management level. Staff were aware of the overall vision and strategy and felt part of the vision for the hospital. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. The service had an open culture where staff could raise concerns. Leaders operated effective governance processes. Leaders and teams used systems to manage performance effectively. The service collected reliable data and analysed it. The information systems were integrated and secure. Leaders and staff engaged well with colleagues. Staff were committed to continually learning and improving services.

However:

• The service did not always follow best practices of Infection prevention and control.
• The service did not report all incidents appropriately on the hospital’s incident management system.
• The risk register for the service contained information that was not up to date.

Updated 24 August 2021

This service has not been rated previously. It was inspected and rated in 2016 but was then under different ownership. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough nursing and support staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep patients safe and to provide the right care and treatment.
• Infection prevention and control processes had been reviewed and developed further to support staff practices during the pandemic.
• Equipment on the wards and theatre were managed effectively with evidence of regular checks and clear records were maintained. This included the emergency equipment such as the resuscitation trolleys which were tagged and easily accessible.
• The service provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff and monitored training compliance.
• The service managed medicines safely and followed good practice guidance. Staff followed their procedures for access to the pharmacy out-of-hours.
• Staff engaged in clinical and submitted data to national audits to evaluate the quality of care they provided.
• Managers ensured staff received training, supervision and appraisal. The ward staff worked well together and as a multidisciplinary team.
• Staff understood and discharged their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• Managers regularly reviewed and adjusted staffing levels and skill mix to provide care and treatment safely.
• Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it.
• Managers used 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 were focused on the needs of patients and delivering individualised care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities.
• The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services. All staff were committed to improving services continually.
• Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. The service promoted equality and diversity in their daily work and provided opportunities for career development. The service had an open culture where patients, their families and staff could raise concerns without fear.
• Leaders operated effective governance processes, throughout the service and with partner organisations. Staff at all levels were clear about their roles and accountabilities and had regular opportunities to meet, discuss and learn from the performance of the service.
• Leaders and teams used systems to manage performance effectively. They identified and escalated relevant risks and issues and identified actions to reduce their impact. They had plans to cope with unexpected events.