• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Communitas Clinics

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

83 Brigstock Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey, CR7 7JH (020) 8689 7800

Provided and run by:
Communitas Clinics Ltd

All Inspections

12 - 18 May 2023

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Communitas Clinics to award a rating. The service was inspected in October 2018, when we found that it was providing care in accordance with the relevant regulations. At the time of inspecting this service in 2018, we did not have the statutory powers to rate the service.

Communitas Clinics (run by Communitas Clinics Ltd) delivers consultant-led community dermatology and ear, nose and throat (ENT) assessment and treatment services for the NHS.

The Managing Director is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Our key findings were:

  • The service delivered care from satellite clinics in London, Hertfordshire and Sussex in spaces run by NHS GP providers.
  • There were systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient safety. Where these were managed by the service they generally worked well. Systems at the satellite clinic sites managed by the host providers were more variable in their effectiveness.
  • The service had systems and processes to ensure that these premises were safe, but they were not consistently effective.
  • The provider was aware of areas of weaknesses and worked to improve them.
  • The provider had systems to keep clinicians up to date with current evidence based practice. We saw evidence that clinicians assessed needs and delivered care and treatment in line with current legislation, standards and guidance.
  • Staff employed by the service had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • Staff treated patients with kindness, respect and compassion.
  • The service organised services to meet patients’ needs. It took account of patient needs and preferences.
  • Patients were able to access care and treatment from the service within an appropriate timescale for their needs.
  • The service took complaints and concerns seriously and responded to them to improve the quality of care.
  • Leaders had the capacity and skills to deliver high-quality, sustainable care.
  • The service had a culture of high-quality sustainable care.
  • There were systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation.

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

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

(Please see the specific details on action required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Develop further clinical audits in ENT to improve the quality of care and outcomes for patients.
  • Include information in final responses to complaints about what patients can do if unhappy with the service’s response.
  • Improve oversight of systems and processes for risk management at satellite clinics.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

23 October 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 23 October 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Communitas Clinics (run by Communitas Clinics Ltd) delivers consultant-led community dermatology and ear, nose and throat assessment and treatment services for the NHS.

The Managing Director is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Two hundred and thirty three people provided feedback about the service. Two hundred and ten of the comments cards we received were wholly positive in their comments.

Our key findings were:

  • There were a number of areas of risk that had been formally risk assessed and were being effectively mitigated. Risks associated with staff who were not fit and proper and from infection had been partially mitigated at the time of the inspection, and further action was taken shortly after the inspection.
  • The service learned and made improvements when things went wrong.
  • Audit was used to check care was delivered according to operating procedures.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Staff were allowed regular time for personal development, meetings to review their progress and annual appraisals.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.
  • Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.


There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the improved processes for managing risks to ensure that they are operating effectively.
  • Consider developing documented protocols for checking that adults accompanying children too young to consent have parental responsibility.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

26 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We were told that the name of the service was currently Croydon PBC Ltd and not Brigstock Family Practice as recorded at the beginning of this report. However, it has not been possible to change the name of the service at this stage.

Croydon PBC and a laser clinic are located within the premises of Brigstock Family Practice although the services are independent of each other. Brigstock Family Practice is responsible for the premises and employs the reception staff.

During our inspection we spoke with four people using the dermatology clinic at Croydon PBC. They told us that staff who worked at the clinic treated them with respect and they felt happy with the service they received. We received some positive comments from people who used the service, these included 'Quality is great. Excellent care, really explained everything' and 'I liked their holistic approach, they explained all the options to me'.

All the people we spoke with were referred by their GP; they told us they received their appointment at the clinic very quickly and often within days. Once at the clinic for their appointments, people usually waited between 15 and 30 minutes before being seen. However, this was not an issue for people who told us 'the consultation was worth the wait'.

13, 14 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service and overall they expressed satisfaction with the care and treatment provided. They felt involved and were provided with sufficient information to make decisions about their treatment. People told us, 'No complaints. I was treated well by everybody,' and "'I found them to be fine. I had no problems with them."

We found that staff were supported to provide appropriate care with training and regular supervision. The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provided.

We were informed that the name of the service was Croydon PBC Ltd and not Brigstock Family Practice as recorded at the beginning of this report. Once the inspection process had commenced it was not possible to alter the heading of the report.