Giffard Drive Surgery

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Giffard Drive Surgery on 10 October 2019 as part of our inspection programme. (Previous comprehensive inspection October 2014)

We decided to undertake an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us. This inspection looked at the following key questions Effective and Well led. We did not check whether this practice was providing Safe, Caring and Responsive services at this inspection because our monitoring of the practice indicated no significant change since the last inspection.

The ratings of Good for the key questions of Safe and Caring and Outstanding for Responsive have been carried forward from the last inspection. The population group ratings of outstanding (with the exception of families, children and young people) have also been carried over from the previous inspection.

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. The service was rated as good for providing effective services and requires improvement for providing well led services. The population group families, children and young people has been rated as requires improvement.

We found that:

• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• Childhood immunisation rates were below the 90% minimum target for uptake and cervical screening was below the 80% national target. The practice had established recall and patient engagement processes which were due to be reviewed by the lead nurse.
• Staff received training to support them in their role. However, some essential training for GPs was overdue, such as health and safety training.
• There were some governance arrangements that required a review and some risks that had not been identified by the practice, such as no monitoring of consent seeking process, gaps in recruitment documentation and care plans not being routinely reviewed or updated.
• Staff told us they felt supported by the management and leadership teams.

Areas where the practice must improve:

• Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care
• Ensure recruitment procedures are established and operated effectively to ensure only fit and proper persons are employed.

Details of the specific action required is shown at the end of this report (please see the requirement notices section).

Areas where the provider should improve:

• Continue to improve the uptake of cervical cytology screening and childhood immunisations.
• Review training monitoring processes and consider how training requirements are circulated and undertaken in a timely way.
• Consider review processes for established care plans to ensure they remain up to date. Also consider how these can be shared to ensure patients receive effective and appropriate care from external stakeholders.
• Review monitoring processes of emergency medicine stock to include checking of expiry dates.

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.