Hey Baby 4D Southend is operated by Hey Baby 4D South East Group Limited. The service provides diagnostic imaging for self-referring women through a range of ultrasound scan examinations during pregnancy. Ultrasound scan packages include early reassurance scans (from seven – 24 weeks), gender scans (from 16 weeks), growth and wellbeing scans (from 24 – 38 weeks) and 4D scan packages (from 24 -34 weeks). The service also offers non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPTS, a blood test taken during pregnancy to identify foetal chromosomal anomalies). Facilities include one ultrasound room, a waiting area, reception, staff area and a disabled toilet.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried an initial short notice announced inspection on 26 February 2019, along with an unannounced visit to the service on 7 March 2019.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The main service provided was diagnostic and screening procedures.

Services we rate

This was the first time we have rated this service. We rated the service as Good overall.

We found good practice in relation to diagnostic imaging:

• The service used well maintained equipment and premises.

• Feedback was positive.

• Staff were seen to be kind, caring and compassionate.

• The service was located close to public transport and accessible to women and visitors.

• The service was responsive to the needs of the local population offering flexibility in choice for appointment times.

However, we also found areas of practice that require improvement in diagnostic imaging:

• The registered manager had a lack of oversight of mandatory training compliance and staff competencies for sonographers working at the service.

• Cleaning records for clinical and non-clinical areas had not been regularly completed.

• There was a lack of audit programme in place. Therefore, we could not gain assurances that the service was routinely monitored to ensure improvements were made.

• The safeguarding lead for the service had not completed level three safeguarding children training despite the service seeing women aged 16 to 17 years of age. There was no child safeguarding policy in place and the service was not registered to see women of this age.

• Patient confidential information was not always stored in a secure manner.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with four requirement notice(s) that affected diagnostic imaging. Details are at the end of the report.

Amanda Stanford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals