The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Marianne Ford

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

38 Manor Road, Deal, Kent, CT14 9BX (01304) 367495

Provided and run by:
Dr Marianne Ford

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr Marianne Ford 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 Dr Marianne Ford, you can give feedback on this service.

9 January 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Marianne Ford on 9 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.

12/06/2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as requires improvement overall. (Previous inspection 3 June 2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – requires improvement

Are services effective? – requires improvement

Are services caring? – good

Are services responsive? – good

Are services well-led? - requires improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive at Dr Marianne Ford on 12 June 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice did not always have clear systems to identify and manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen.
  • The practice did not have a systematic approach to review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it.
  • Staff were encouraged to develop through the organisation including from administration in to clinical roles.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

There was a strong, visible, patient-centered culture across the practice. Staff were highly motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and promoted people’s dignity. Relationships between people who used the service, those close to them and staff were caring and supportive. These relationships were highly valued by all staff and the GP. This was evident by the high number of carers identified and supported by the all members of the team. People’s emotional and social needs were as important as their physical needs and all members of the team took an active role in referring patients and their carers to the local care navigator when necessary to help ensure necessary and timely support was given.

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
  • 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:

  • Review and improve how patients’ pain is recorded in their notes.
  • Review and improve security of patients notes when the premises are not staffed.

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

3 June 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Marianne Ford on 3 June 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. It was also good for providing services for older people, people with long-term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people (including those recently retired and students), people living in vulnerable circumstances, 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.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles, with the exception of enhanced training for the infection control lead. 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.

However there were some areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should:

  • Review the training arrangements for infection control, including the lead within the practice, to ensure their responsibilities in relation to the role are clearly understood.
  • Review the process for monitoring professional registration checks for GPs and nursing staff.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice