• Organisation
  • SERVICE PROVIDER

Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust

This is an organisation that runs the health and social care services we inspect

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings
Important: Services have been transferred to this provider from another provider

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 22 December 2022

Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust was formed on 1 October 2021 when Salford Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust legally acquired Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.

The trust operates a range of acute, community health and social care services which are provided by the trust's four care organisations; Salford, Oldham, Rochdale and Bury.

The trust has over 20,000 staff and has four acute hospitals – Salford Royal Hospital, Royal Oldham Hospital, Fairfield General Hospital and Rochdale Infirmary which provide a full range of acute services, including acute medicine, urgent and emergency care, acute frailty units, rehabilitation services, dental services and surgical services, to a population of approximately 1 million people within hospital settings and the community. The trusts had been working in partnership from 2016 until the acquisition. This included a shared executive leadership team.

When a trust acquires another trust in order to improve the quality and safety of care, we do not aggregate ratings from the previously separate trust at trust level for up to two years from date of acquisition. The ratings for the trust in this report are therefore based only on the ratings for Salford Royal Hospital and our rating of leadership at the trust level.

Our normal practice following an acquisition would be to inspect all services run by the enlarged trust. However, our usual inspection work has been curtailed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the Northern Care Alliance, we inspected only those services where we were aware of current risks. We did not rate the hospitals overall.

In our ratings tables starting on page 30 we show all ratings for services run by the trust, including those from earlier inspections and from those hospitals we did not inspect this time.

This was our first inspection since the formation of the Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust.

We carried out this unannounced (staff did not know we were coming) inspection of Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation Trust as part of our continual checks on the safety and quality of healthcare services and because it was a new provider which ran services formerly run by different trusts.

We visited Salford Royal Hospital, Royal Oldham Hospital, Fairfield General Hospital and Rochdale Infirmary as part of our inspection between 8 and 11 August and on 12 September 2022. Our inspection was unannounced to enable us to observe routine activity.

In addition, we inspected the well-led key question for the trust overall. The Well Led inspection was announced and took place between 13 and 15 September 2022.

We did not inspect all the core services provided by the trust as this was a risk-based inspection. We continue to monitor all services as part of our ongoing engagement and will re-inspect them as appropriate.

This is our first rating of the Northern Care Alliance. We rated them as ​requires improvement​ because:

We rated safe, effective, responsive and well-led as requires improvement, and caring as good. In rating the trust, we took into account the current ratings of the Salford services not inspected this time.

Leaders had the skills, abilities and experience to run the service. Most leaders understood the priorities and issues the trust faced. However, some expressed different levels of understanding of the drivers for change and the priorities articulated by their executive colleagues. Staff reported leaders were not always visible and approachable.

Staff did not always feel respected, supported and valued. However, they remained focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Some staff expressed reservations about raising concerns and others did not always feel listened to. The service had a culture where patients and their families could raise concerns without fear.

Leaders did not operate consistent, effective governance processes throughout the service. There were differences in policies and clinical practice which did not reflect best-practice guidelines. Most leaders were clear about the need to review these functions to ensure they were fit for purpose.

Leaders and teams did not consistently use systems to manage performance effectively. They identified and escalated relevant risks and issues but did not always take actions to reduce their impact. Staff did not always have the opportunity to contribute to decision-making and help avoid pressures compromising the quality of care.

The service collected data and analysed it. However, not all staff were assured that the data was always accurate. Staff could not always find the data they needed, in accessible formats to understand performance, make decisions and improvements. Data was not recorded or presented uniformly across the trust and some important data was not captured. Data or notifications were submitted to external organisations as required. The information systems were secure. However, they were not always reliable or integrated well. The trust had recently appointed an experienced executive with specific responsibility for improving the management of digital data.

Leaders did not always actively and openly engage with patients and staff to plan and manage services. However, they had plans in place to improve these. The trust engaged with external stakeholders and local partners to help improve services for patients. 

However:

The trust had a vision for what it wanted to achieve and a strategy to turn it into action, developed with all relevant stakeholders. The vision and strategy were focused on sustainability of services and aligned to local plans within the wider health economy. Leaders and most staff understood and knew how to apply them and monitor progress.  

All staff were committed to continually learning and improving services. They had a good understanding of quality improvement methods and the skills to use them. Leaders encouraged innovation and participation in research. Improvement projects were at various stages of development and completion across the trust. The trust reported and investigated complaints and incidents. However, these were not always completed in a timely manner and learning was not always shared with relevant departments across the trust.

How we carried out the inspection

During our inspection we spoke with a variety of staff including consultants, doctors, therapists, nurses, healthcare support workers, pharmacists, patient experience staff, domestic staff, administrators and the trust’s board. During the inspection we also spoke with patients and relatives. We visited numerous clinical areas across the hospital sites. We reviewed patient records, national data and other information provided by the trust.

We held several staff focus groups with representatives from all over the trust to enable staff who were not on duty during the inspection to speak to inspectors. The focus groups included junior and senior staff from pharmacy, junior and senior nursing staff, junior doctors and consultants, allied health professionals, staff representing equality, diversity and inclusion. We also had focus groups for the non-executive directors and governors.

You can find further information about how we carry out our inspections on our website: www.cqc.org.uk/what-we-do/how-we-do-our-job/what-we-do-inspection.

Community health services for adults

Outstanding

Updated 27 March 2015

We visited a sample of Community Adult Services on 13/14th January 2014. We held two focus groups with a range of staff who worked within the service. We talked with about 35 people who use services (including 13 telephone interviews) and four carers. We spoke with six managers, and about 20 registered and four unregistered staff. We observed how people were being cared for in clinics and in their own homes and reviewed care or treatment records of people who use services.

We judged that Community Adult Services were outstanding. This was because we found that there arrangements to ensure that patients were safe, and that there were systems to report, investigate and learn from safety incidents and near-misses. We found that care and treatment was based on current guidance and best practice and there were arrangements to monitor the standards of care. Patients told us that they were treated with kindness and empathy and that their dignity was upheld. Services were arranged to respond to patients’ individual needs and could be accessed when they were required. We found that services were well-led, with a positive culture with a clear vision, values and strategy which staff were engaged in and identified with. There were robust governance systems that ensured information flowed freely between the various levels of management, including the executive team and front-line staff.

Community dental services

Good

Updated 24 August 2018

This service has not been inspected before. We rated it as good because:

  • Infection control procedures were in line with nationally recognised guidance. Premises and equipment were well maintained. Staff had the right qualifications, skills and experience to keep people safe. Processes had been put in place to prevent avoidable harm. Staff were knowledgeable about issues relating to safeguarding and there were systems in place to refer children and vulnerable adults.
  • Staff provided care and treatment based on nationally recognised guidance. Staff worked together as a team and with other healthcare professionals in the best interest of patients. Staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and with regards to Gillick competence.
  • Staff cared for patients with compassion and kindness. We observed staff treating patient with dignity and respect. Patients and their families were involved in decisions about treatment.
  • The service took into account patients’ individual needs. The service reached out to vulnerable people including those with medical, physical or social issues. Clinics had been adjusted to enable persons with disabilities to access care and treatment.
  • The service was currently undergoing a period of change as the clinical lead and head dental nurse had recently left. There was resilience in the service to ensure the safety and quality of care and treatment was not compromised. There were systems and processes in place for identifying risks and planning to reduce them. Staff engaged with patients and other healthcare professionals in order to continually improve the service.

Community health inpatient services

Good

Updated 27 March 2015

We have rated the community adult inpatient service provided by Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust as good. We found that there were appropriate arrangements in place to ensure the safety and wellbeing of patients. Governance systems were suitable robust to ensure that where incidents occurred, these were investigated, lessons were learnt and changes in practice were communicated to staff. Care and treatment was based on current guidance and best practice. There were arrangements in place to audit care to determine its overall effectiveness. Patients told us that they were treated with dignity and compassion and that they were involved in the planning of their care. Services were well-led; staff demonstrated and exuded a ‘can-do’ attitude which was based upon providing safe care to their patients.