The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust

Updated 12 July 2019

The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust operates acute hospital services from three hospital sites:

• Russells Hall hospital

• Corbett Outpatient Centre.

• Guest Outpatient Centre.

In addition, the trust provides community services in a range of community facilities to the populations of Dudley, parts of Sandwell borough and some communities in South Staffordshire and Wyre Forest.

The trust serves a population of around 450,000 covering these boroughs with services commissioned by Dudley Clinical Commissioning Group.

The trust has 629 core inpatient beds, 21 escalation beds and 152 day case beds.

Updated 12 July 2019

Our rating of the trust stayed the same. We rated it as requires improvement because:

• Corbett Hospital was rated as inadequate overall, and in one service safe and well-led were rated as inadequate.
• Russells Hall Hospital was rated requires improvement overall, in two services, safe was rated as inadequate and one service as inadequate for well led.
• Community services were rated good as overall.

Our full inspection report summarising what we found and the supporting evidence appendix containing detailed evidence and data about the trust is available on our website – www.cqc.org.uk/provider/RNA/reports.

Updated 12 July 2019

Updated 12 July 2019

Updated 18 April 2018

We rated it as good because:

• The service managed patient safety incidents well. Staff recognised incidents and reported them appropriately. Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service. When things went wrong, staff apologised and gave patients honest information and suitable support.
• The service provided care and treatment based on national guidance and evidence of its effectiveness. Managers checked to make sure staff followed guidance.
• We saw excellent innovative multidisciplinary team working. Staff of different disciplines worked together as a team to benefit patients. Doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals supported each other to provide good care.
• Staff cared for patients with compassion. Feedback from patients confirmed that staff treated them well and with kindness.
• The trust planned and provided services in a way that met the needs of local people.
• Managers across the trust promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values.
• The trust was committed to improving services by learning from when things go well and when they go wrong, promoting training, research and innovation.

However

• Community staff were not fully compliant with mandatory training or appraisal rates.
• Whilst we were confident patients were receiving person centred care, we found patient care plans were generic and not person centred.
• People could not always access services when they needed it. Waiting times for treatment were not always in line with good practice.

Updated 12 July 2019

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

• The leadership team had planned for enough nursing staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.

• Staff were provided with mandatory training in key skills. Compliance was good, and education, training, learning, reflection and learning was promoted, supported and embedded.

• Staff kept detailed records of patients’ care and treatment. Records were clear, up-to-date and easily available to all staff providing care. An improved electronic recording system with a view to becoming paperless meant that there were ongoing improvements in record accessibility.

• The team provided care and treatment based on national guidance and evidence of its effectiveness. Managers monitored and checked practice to make sure staff followed guidance. Staff consulted and adhered to NICE guidelines which meant patients received evidence-based care.

• Managers monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment and used the findings to improve them. They compared local results with those of other services to learn from them.

• Staff of different disciplines worked together as a team to benefit patients. Doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals supported each other to provide good care. Joint working and collaboration with external stakeholders was fully embedded in the work carried out to support patients and their families.

• The team consistently cared for patients with compassion. Feedback from patients confirmed that staff treated them well and with kindness. Staff provided emotional support to patients to minimise their distress. There were are a range of supportive services available to patients and their families while using services and following bereavement.

• The team involved patients and those close to them in decisions about their care and treatment.

• The team took account of patients’ individual needs. Interpreters were accessible for patients who did not speak English. There were champions who had received additional training to ensure good quality care across the board. Patients, the carers and staff could access mental health teams and a psychologist for support.

• People could access the service when they needed it. Staff responded to referrals to treatment promptly and in line with good practice. There were 7-day a week, 24 hour a day services available and accessible specialist support out of hours.

• Managers at all levels in the trust had the right skills and abilities to run a service providing high-quality sustainable care. Managers across the trust promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values.

• The trust used a systematic approach to continually improve the quality of its services and safeguarding high standards of care by creating an environment in which excellence in clinical care would flourish.

• The trust was committed to improving services by learning from when things went well and when they went wrong, promoting training, research and innovation.

However, we also found:

• Despite support to recruit a locum consultant, the service did not have enough medical staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.