The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Homewell Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Civic Centre Road, Havant, Hampshire, PO9 2AY (023) 9248 2124

Provided and run by:
The Homewell.Curlew Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Homewell Practice on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about The Homewell Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

29 March 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced inspection at The Homewell Practice (Curlew Practice) between 17 and 29 March 2022.

Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Safe – Requires Improvement

Effective – Good

Caring – Good (carried over from the previous inspection)

Responsive – Good (carried over from the previous inspection)

Well-led – Good

Following our previous inspection in July 2019 the practice was rated Good overall and for all key questions.

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection between 17 and 29 March 2022 as part of our provider monitoring programme. The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Homewell Practice (Curlew Practice) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

How we carried out the inspection.

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently. This inspection/review was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included :

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A short site visit

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as Good overall

We found :

  • All staff had undertaken mandatory training appropriate to their role.

  • The practice had made adjustments associated with the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure that patients were kept safe and protected from avoidable harm.

  • The practice was able to demonstrate staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. Staff members were appraised annually and received appropriate supervision and training.

  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care. The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.

  • Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team and if they raised concerns these would be listened to and acted upon.

  • The practice had an open and supportive culture, where there was a focus on improvement.

However:

  • The practice did not always carry out reviews and or monitoring relating to the safe prescribing of some medicines.

  • The practice’s system for reviewing safety alerts was not always effective.

  • The practice’s system for the security of prescriptions needed to be enhanced.

  • The practice did not have an active patient participation group (PPG), however, they were actively trying to recruit at the time of our inspection.

We found there was a breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to Safe care and treatment.

The provider must ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients. The provider must:

  • Ensure appropriate reviews and monitoring are taking place prior to the prescribing of medicines including high risk medicines.
  • Ensure there is an effective system for acting on safety alerts and for the continued monitoring of historic alerts.

In addition, the provider should:

  • Continue to recruit to the patient participation group (PPG).
  • Embed new processes for recording prescription stationary serial numbers.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

3 July 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an annual regulatory review of The Homewell.Curlew Practice in April 2019 as part of our new programme. The practice’s annual regulatory review did not indicate that the quality of care had changed in relation to the key questions. The purpose of this inspection was to follow up on the previous breach to regulations. At a previous inspection of The Homewell.Curlew Practice on 7 June 2018, we rated the practice as Good for providing Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive services. However, we rated the practice as Requires Improvement for providing Well-led services. We carried out an announced focussed follow up inspection on 3 July 2019 to inspect Well-led.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have now rated Well Led as Good.

We rated the practice as Good for providing Well Led services because:

  • The practice had addressed all the issues raised at the previous inspection, as described in the supporting evidence table.
  • The practice had a culture which drove high quality sustainable care.
  • There were governance structures and systems which were regularly reviewed.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

07/06/2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating July 2015 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Requires Improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Homewell.Curlew Practice on 7 June 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had introduced a hub access service for patients. The hub offered advice to non-urgent queries, arranged appointments and was supported by a nurse practitioner daily.
  • The practice had recently recruited a reception manager to oversee the running of the reception area and team of receptionists.
  • The locum pack used by the practice did not contain any information on safeguarding procedures or how to make referrals.
  • All staff currently employed by the practice had undertaken safeguarding training but the practice did not provide evidence of what level of training any staff member had received.
  • The practice’s uptake for cervical screening was below the national target rate of 80%.
  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • To review the contents of the locum pack to include details on safeguarding processes.
  • Continue to review and act on patient feedback in relation to access.
  • To review how verbal consent is consistently recorded in patient records.
  • To address the practice’s uptake of cervical screening

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

2nd July 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Homewell.Curlew practice on 2nd July 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. The practice is also rated as good for the six population groups which are older people, people with long term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people (including those recently retired and students), people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • The practice had recently merged and involved patient groups to minimise disruption to care.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to recruitment checks.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • 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.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

12 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with people who used the service, their relatives, GPs, administration, clinical staff and managers. We found the service to be welcoming with friendly staff.

We saw that on arrival at the service people could speak to reception staff or use the touch in booking screen. People told us staff treated them respectfully and were helpful. One person told us: "I never feel disrespected or patronised."

People told us that their treatment was clearly explained to them and they were able to ask questions and make choices about their treatment. This enabled people to make informed decisions about their treatment. One person told us, 'Treatment options are explained to me; due to my condition my partner accompanies me'. Another said, 'You are given the opportunity to ask any questions'.

Staff spoke politely to people and consultations were carried out in private treatment rooms. Information was available for people which included health promotion, access to support services and information about the practice and the services it provided.

Care and treatment was delivered in a way that ensured people's needs were met. People we spoke with were very positive about their experiences of care and treatment at the practice. Comments made included, "Practice is good' and 'Receptionists are really helpful'.

Policy and procedures were in place for reporting concerns in relation to both adult and child protection. Staff had received training in safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. People we spoke with confirmed that they were treated well and felt safe.

People said they felt that there were enough staff and that they had the right skills and experience to meet their needs. One told us, 'Service now is fantastic, GP's lovely, they have time for you. 100% friendly and it is really good to have the same day clinic'.

There were formal mechanisms and documentation in place to indicate the practice was able to monitor or assure the quality of the service people received.