At our inspection on 28 June 2012 we found in most respects the provider was meeting the standards required. However, there were some shortcomings in the training and support provided to staff in the phlebotomy department. The provider was taking action to address these issues but some of this action was still outstanding at the time of the inspection.

At our visit on 13 March 2013 we did not speak to people who use the service as the focus of our inspection was on the training and support provided to staff in the phlebotomy department. We found that the provider had made the improvements set out in the action plan submitted in response to the previous inspection. People were now cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

As staff in the phlebotomy department work at both the Guy’s Hospital and St Thomas locations we did not visit the Guy’s Hospital location on this occasion. Instead we spoke with staff at the St Thomas’ location who covered both sites. The judgements in the separate report for each location are therefore identical in most respects.

GSTS Pathology – St Thomas’ Hospital and GSTS Pathology – Guy’s Hospital are registered with the Care Quality Commission as separate locations of the provider GSTS Pathology LLP. However, both locations form part of the same management structure, are managed by the same registered manager and are subject to the same policies and procedures and governance processes. Although therefore separate inspections were conducted on different dates at each location, much of the evidence and judgements apply to both locations and are repeated in both inspection reports. The separate reports highlight any issues specific to the location.

The main area where staff at GSTS Pathology - St Thomas’ Hospital and GSTS Pathology – Guy’s Hospital had direct contact with people who used the service was in the phlebotomy department where people were provided with blood tests. We therefore spoke with people attending the department at both locations and they all commented positively about the facilities provided, the care and treatment they received and the staff who worked there. They told us that they received appropriate information about the test and staff answered any questions they had. They said that the staff were kind and approachable and were competent and skilled at doing their job. People told us that they felt safe in the department and that it was clean and tidy.

We found that in most respects the provider was meeting the standards required. However, there were some shortcomings in the training and support provided to staff in the phlebotomy department. The provider was taking action to address these issues but some of this action was still outstanding at the time of our inspection.