You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 02/07/2020 to 11/08/2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Newland Health Centre on 30 May 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good, but was rated as requires improvement for the safe key question. The full comprehensive report on the May 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Newland Health Centre on our website at .

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 02 July 2020 to confirm that the practice was improving:

  • Reviews of incidents and near misses.
  • Their recruitment arrangements.
  • Patient outcomes as a result of clinical audits.
  • Their learning from significant events.
  • Their system for monitoring and acting on uncollected prescriptions.
  • Their fire alarm testing procedures.

This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

The practice remains rated as Good overall and has improved its rating of Requires improvement for the safe key question to Good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice had improved their process, monitoring and review of incidents and near misses.
  • The practice had improved their recruitment arrangements.
  • The practice had implemented an annual audit plan which identified patient outcomes.
  • The practice had improved their process, monitoring and review of significant events.
  • The practice had improved their process for the monitoring of uncollected prescriptions.
  • The practice had improved their process for fire alarm management and testing.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Review carried out on 21 January 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Newland Health Centre on 21 January 2020. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

Inspection carried out on 30 May 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Newland Health Centre on 30 May 2017. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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. However, reviews and investigations were not thorough enough.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to recruitment checks.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Data showed patient outcomes were low compared to the national average. The practice had a high proportion of patients who were aged 18-24 in their practice population and a much smaller proportion of patients with long term conditions compared to local and national averages. Patients who had a long term condition, for example asthma, tended to miss appointments for reviews as they were only resident during term time, which led to data appearing low.

  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Most patients we spoke with said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • 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.
  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include all necessary employment checks for all staff.

  • Carry out clinical audits and re-audits to improve patient outcomes.
  • Improve the identification, analysis, action plans and staff learning from significant events.
  • Implement a system to monitor and act upon uncollected prescriptions.
  • Implement regular fire alarm testing.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice