The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: GTD Healthcare Head Office Also known as gtd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Forum, 2 Tameside Business Park, Windmill Lane, Denton, Manchester, Greater Manchester, M34 3QS (0161) 337 3465

Provided and run by:
GoToDoc Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

8 March 2018

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at gtd healthcare Head Office on 6 and 7 February 2017. The overall rating for the service was Good with Well led as requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the February 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for gtd healthcare Head Office on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At that inspection the area that required improvement was well led:

  • We found staff were not always aware of the availability of information, such as names of lead roles and some policies and procedures. Some clinical staff were not aware of the quality monitoring processes in place and could not articulate any improvements identified. Staff couldn’t always access required information such as policies and procedures.

This most recent inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 8 March 2018 to confirm that the service had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 6 and 7 February 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the service remains rated as Good and ‘well led’ is now also rated as Good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • We saw that all staff, across the different sites had access to and participated where appropriate in audits and learning was communicated via various means.
  • Staff now had access to policies and procedures at all times and those staff working remotely had access to printed copies and summaries of key policies and procedures should they not have access to the provider intranet.
  • We saw details of staff in lead roles which was accessible to all staff via induction, displays in key locations and the provider intranet.
  • Child safeguarding training records were maintained for all staff and this was monitored on a monthly basis and they were issued with reminders when training was due for renewal.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

06/02/2017 and 07/02/2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the GTD Healthcare Head Office (an out of hours provider) on 06/02/2017 and 07/02/2017. Overall the service is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for recording, reporting and learning from significant events.
  • Most risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ care needs were assessed and delivered in a timely way according to need. The service met the National Quality Requirements.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • There was a system in place that enabled staff access to patient records, and the out-of-hours staff provided other services, for example the patient’s own GP and hospital, with information following contact with patients as was appropriate.
  • The service managed patients’ care and treatment in a timely way.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • The service worked proactively with other organisations and providers to develop services that supported alternatives to hospital admission where appropriate and improved the patient experience.
  • The service had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. The vehicles used for home visits were clean and well equipped.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The service proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure all required clinical staff participate in two cycle clinical audits and are made aware of any improvements identified. 
  • Ensure policies are accessible to all staff at all times.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Review how information is cascaded about lead roles for example the infection control lead.
  • Review training records on safeguarding children.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

10 and 12 March 2014

During a routine inspection

Go To Doc (GTD) provides out-of-hours General Practitioner (GP) services for more than one million patients living in Oldham, Tameside, Glossop, Manchester, Southport, Formby and South Sefton.

We carried out the inspection as part of our new inspection programme to test our approach going forward. It took place over two days with a team that included a Lead CQC inspector, a CQC Inspector a GP, a practice manager, a nurse and an expert-by-experience.

We found the service was effective in meeting patient needs and had taken positive steps to ensure people who may have difficulty in accessing services were enabled to do so. There was an effective system to ensure that patient information was promptly shared with the patient’s own GP to ensure continuity of care.

The provider regularly met with local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to discuss capacity issues and possible service improvements.

Patients told us that they were happy with the care and treatment they received and felt safe. Patients and carers we spoke with said staff displayed a kind and caring attitude and we observed patients being treated with respect and kindness whilst their dignity and confidentiality was maintained.

There were systems in place to help ensure patient safety through the safe management of medicines. However the policy was out of date and the auditing and monitoring of these systems was inconsistent.

We saw that GTD had attended community events to communicate with minority groups such as Eastern European and Somalian groups. They had also worked with faith groups and held workshops to raise awareness of the service.

The provider had taken steps to ensure that all staff underwent recruitment and induction processes to help ensure their suitability to care for patients. However induction processes were not always appropriately completed and documented for all staff.

Care and treatment was being delivered in line with current published best practice. Patients’ needs were consistently met in a timely manner. The provider routinely investigated any breaches of the national quality requirements for out-of-hours services.

There was a strong and stable management structure, although the provider needed to increase the visablity of the leadership and senior management structure to engage with and reinforce the organisational values and strategy with all staff.

10 March 2014

During an inspection