BS Plastic Surgery Ltd Also known as Ministry of Aesthetics

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

The practice had an inclusive and positive culture of continuous learning and improvement. Leaders supported staff, they ensured there was collaboration with partners to coordinate and deliver care that was safe, integrated, person-centred and sustainable. We found effective governance and management systems in place ensuring the timely identification of risks, monitoring of performance and a focus on improving patient outcomes.

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.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The management team were visible, supportive and had a good working relationship with the staff. They encouraged staff to put forward ideas for changing and developing the clinic further to enhance the patient experience. Staff told us they were proud to work for the clinic and felt able to raise any concerns with confidence. They felt valued and supported by management.

Staff shared and supported clear visions and values for the organisation, promoting equality and diversity. There were established and effective governance systems employed at the service. For example; there were processes for identifying reporting and responding to significant incidents and complaints. People and their experiences of the service were valued, listened to, and responded to. Weekly staff meeting were held, where quality and sustainability issues were discussed and staff were held accountable for their areas of responsibility. Regular clinical audits were conducted to assess the quality of interventions, patient outcomes and inform improvements. There were established and effective shared care agreements in place to co-ordinated person-centred care.

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.