• Community
  • Community healthcare service

Lawson Street Health Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Health Centre, Lawson Street, Stockton On Tees, Cleveland, TS18 1HU 0300 330 1122

Provided and run by:
HCRG Care Services Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 3 March 2022

Lawson Street Health Centre (known locally as Teesside Sexual Health Service) was provided by HCRG Care Services Ltd at the time of the inspection although formerly owned by Virgin Care Ltd. The service had been registered with CQC since 10 April 2013.

The Lawson Street service is contracted to provide specialist sexual health services in the Teesside area to adults and young people aged 13 years and over. This includes the provision for both contraception and genito-urinary medicine services.

The provider is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the following regulated activities:

• Treatment of disease, disorder and or injury

• Diagnostic and screening procedures

• Family planning

• Transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely.

The service, which has a registered manager, operates from four locations:

• Lawson Street Medical Centre, Stockton on Tees

• The Live Well Centre, Middlesbrough

• The Fens Medical Centre, Hartlepool

• Redcar and Cleveland Leisure Centre and Community Heart, Redcar

The service is commissioned by Stockton Borough Council on behalf of Hartlepool, Stockton-on-Tees, Middlesbrough and Redcar & Cleveland Local Authorities, Tees Valley clinical commissioning group and NHS England.

There had been two previous inspections of this service, carried out on 13 September 2013 and 28 February 2017 - 01 March 2017 and 13 March 2017. These inspections found the provider to be meeting all standards inspected.

What people who use the service say

We spoke with seven patients during our inspection and reviewed feedback from 1713 patients from July to December 2021. Patients who used the service gave overwhelmingly positive comments. They said the service was professional, friendly and accessible and respect and dignity was maintained from start to finish. Staff took time to make patients feel comfortable and gave them information and the time needed to make informed choices. We spoke with three support workers who accompany patients to their appointments. They told us that staff took measures to put the patients at ease and considered their individual needs when providing information and care.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 3 March 2022

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

  • The service was clean and well maintained. Staff followed infection prevention procedures to keep patients safe. Staff assessed and managed risk well and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding. Staff ensured that clients who required urgent care were seen promptly.
  • Staff followed best practice and national guidance. Staff were experienced, qualified and had the right skills and knowledge to meet the needs of patients.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and took account of their individual needs. Staff took time to interact with patients and those close to them in a respectful and considerate way. The service received consistently positive feedback from patients.
  • The teams had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of the clients. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal. The service was locally well led, with a positive staff culture.
  • Staff had good links with GP’s, social care, police, sexual assault referral centre and attended multi agency meeting and child sexual exploitation meetings.
  • There was effective engagement with hard to reach groups and young people, through subcontracting arrangements with specialist providers’

However:

  • Workloads for administrative and clinical staff were high and had been for some time due to COVID-19. As a result, the coil fitting wait list for patients was at 12 weeks.
  • There were some gaps in relation to clinical leadership input to corporate governance and strategic planning.
  • The service had not managed to report accurate data to provide meaningful results to measure all performance.
  • Not all staff had up to date job descriptions.
  • The emergency trolley in Stockton was not easily accessible.
  • Recent Faculty of Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare Guidance for 12 months contraception pill to be prescribed in safe circumstances had not been followed.
  • The Provider had not had reasonable engagement with staff of its change of ownership.