Hampshire Travel and Vaccination Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating stays the same.

This service scored 59 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not always have a proactive and positive culture of safety based on openness and honesty. The service was not able to demonstrate an effective system was in place to identify any concerns about safety. For example, we saw that systems were in place to ensure that incidents were appropriately recorded and investigated to learn from and reduce the risk of recurrence; although we were advised there had not been any significant events, near misses; complaints or compliments recorded since November 2020. We did not see evidence of any analysis to further understand this position.

The service was able to evidence their system to receive and act upon external safety events as well as patient and medicine alerts. The provider had a mechanism in place discussing these as clinic meetings. However, lessons learnt were not evident to demonstrate the service continued to identify and embed good practice. For example, the provider told us there had been no significant events or complaints. Staff felt supported to raise concerns to the management team. Clinical meetings documented that significant events were part of the agenda, however there were no systems in place to evidence the oversight of this.

The service worked with people to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. After a consultation appointment, the service recommended the patient inform their NHS doctor about the treatment they had received. There were systems in place for processing information relating to new patients. Patient records were written and managed in a way that kept patients safe. Patient records showed a health questionnaire form had been completed prior to their appointment. There were processes and templates for staff to record accurate travel plans including destinations and timescales. From our review of 2 care records, documentation had been completed appropriately and included additional details to allow the clinicians to record the consultation accurately. However, it was observed that the records lacked details of how potential side effects were discussed with the patient. The provider told us that they would add this to their patient records. The service did follow up with patients who had not attended for appointments

The service had a positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events.

At our last inspection, the registered manager completed the appropriate level of safeguarding training for their role. At this inspection, the training had been completed but it was noted to be out of date as per the service’s own safeguarding policy. For example, the previous module expired in September 2024 and the most recent training module had been completed in March 2025.

Staff were aware of high-risk travel destinations for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and their legal responsibilities to alert authorities of suspected FGM activity. The service had a safeguarding policy, and it detailed how safeguarding concerns would be reported and who was overall the responsible person for this reporting process. The service had a system in place to ensure that an adult accompanied a child who had parental responsibility and followed up with patients should they not arrive for an appointment.

The service did not always work well with people to understand and manage risks. For example, review of patient records highlighted the service’s ‘Patient travel clinic risk assessment’ did not include information of potential side effects and if an information leaflet had been given to the patient after the vaccine had been given. The provider told us that they would include these for future appointments.

However, appropriate emergency equipment and medicines were kept at the service and staff were aware of how to find these. Systems for checking emergency equipment, and the expiry dates of medicines were effective. The service ensured they had adequate knowledge of people’s health and their medical history before administering any vaccination.

The service did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. The premise included one reception area, an office and the one treatment room. Staff were trained in emergency procedures however the receptionist was not trained in the event of a spillage in the waiting area for example spills of various liquids, including bodily fluids. The environment was clean and tidy, however in the treatment room, there were no cleaning schedules maintained in between patients and although there was an overarching premises cleaning schedule, it did not specify the rooms or equipment to adequately audit trail all cleaning activities. The provider had a Portable Appliance Testing certificate dated 20 March 2025 which highlighted one issue of concern; however, this was confirmed as dealt with during the inspection. The fire alarm system was tested 6 monthly and records observed confirmed this.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff however oversight of training was limited to ensure training modules were kept up to date. There were gaps in staff training records and some training had not been refreshed at regular intervals as per the service’s own policies. For example, infection prevention and control level 2 training was noted to be required every two years , and despite training certificates being provided for this inspection which showed a completion date of 19 March 2025 , previous certificates showed the modules had not been completed since 15 September 2021. However, the provider had carried out appropriate recruitment checks, and relevant recruitment documentation was in place. Staff whose role included the administration of travel vaccinations had received specific training in providing travel health advice and vaccinations and could demonstrate how they stayed up to date. For example, those administering the yellow fever vaccination had been trained to the standard required by the National Travel Health Network and Centre.

The service did not always assess or manage the risk of infection. They did not always detect and control the risk of it spreading. The service had a designated infection prevention and control lead, however staff had not received the appropriate training in this topic. This was raised with the provider and the designated person completed the required training and evidence of this was received. A cleaning schedule for the premises were in place; however, the provider could not demonstrate which rooms and equipment had been cleaned. For example, the treatment room used by the service did not have cleaning schedules demonstrating all surfaces were cleaned after each appointment. However, the treatment room and clinical equipment was noted to be clean and free from dust during our onsite visit. There was a risk assessment in place for legionella water testing which was dated 25 April 2024. There was an infection control audit check and this was completed 17 November 2024. All actions from this audit had been completed within the appropriate timescale. An Infection Control Risk assessment had also been completed on the 26 November 2024 and no concerns were found. Appropriate hand washing arrangements were available and personal protective equipment were also in place. There were systems in place for safely managing the healthcare waste.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning for their vaccine appointment. Staff received regular training, were competency assessed on vaccine immunisation and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of vaccines. Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for emergency medicines and vaccines. The provider’s cold chain policy referred to a ‘back up fridge’ however the provider did not have this in place. The provider told us that should the vaccine fridge fail the contents would be disposed of and they would amend the policy to reflect this process. Waste was disposed of appropriately. Staff stored medical gases, such as oxygen, safely and completed required safety risk assessments. The provider had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and disease report updates. The provider had a prescribing vaccines policy, and this was last been reviewed April 2025.