The Birth Company is operated by The Birth Company Limited. The service provides diagnostic pregnancy ultrasound services to self-funding pregnant women over the age of 18.

We inspected the diagnostic imaging facilities.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out a short notice inspection on 21 January 2019. We gave staff two working days’ notice that we were coming to inspect to ensure the availability of the registered manager and clinics.

To get to the heart of women’s 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 (MCA).

The main service provided was ultrasound scanning.

Services we rate

This was the first inspection of this service. We rated it as Good overall.

We found good practice in relation to diagnostic imaging:

• There were sufficient numbers of staff with the necessary skills, experience and qualifications to meet women’s needs.

• There was a programme of mandatory training which all staff completed, and systems for checking staff competencies.

• Equipment was maintained and serviced appropriately and the environment was visibly clean.

• Records were up to date and complete and kept protected from unauthorised access.

• The service had implemented a programme of audits relating to patient outcomes

• Staff demonstrated a kind and caring approach to the women using the service and supported their emotional needs.

• Appointments were available during the evening, at weekends and at short notice if required.

• The service had supportive and competent managers. Staff understood the vision and values of the organisation.

However:

• The service had not conducted a hand hygiene audit.

• The service did not accurately collate all incidents to enable them to monitor trends. .

• Not all staff had received level two safeguarding children training, however staff understood their roles in relation to safeguarding.

• Sharps boxes did not adhere to the BS7320UN3291 standards in line with health and safety regulation 2013 (The sharps regulations).

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Dr Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London & South East)

We spoke with three patients, who all told us that they were given adequate information and were treated in privacy and with respect.

Patients we spoke with told us that they felt safe on the premises and were satisfied with their care and treatment. One patient described her care as "excellent".