Background to this inspection
Updated
28 April 2016
Chalk Surgery is situated in Chalk, Kent and has a registered patient population of approximately 2,800.
The practice staff consist of one GP (male), one practice manager, one practice nurse (female), one diabetic nurse (female), one healthcare assistant (female) as well as administration and reception staff. The practice also employs locum GPs to cover the permanent GPs absence. There is a reception and a waiting area on the ground floor. Patient areas are accessible to patients with mobility issues as well as parents with children and babies.
The practice is not a training or teaching practice (teaching practices take medical students and training practices have GP trainees and Foundation Year Two junior doctors).
The practice has a general medical services (GMS) contract with NHS England for delivering primary care services to local communities.
Primary medical services are provided Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday between the hours of 8.30am to 1.30pm and 2.30pm to 6.30pm, and Thursday 8.30am to 1pm. Extended hours surgeries are offered Monday 6.30pm to 8pm. Primary medical services are available to patients registered at Chalk Surgery via an appointments system. There are a range of clinics for all age groups as well as the availability of specialist nursing treatment and support. There are arrangements with other providers (the 111 service) to deliver services to patients outside of Chalk Surgery’s working hours.
Services are provided from Chalk Surgery, 48 Lower Higham Road, Chalk, Gravesend, Kent, DA12 2NG, only.
Updated
28 April 2016
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Satish C Pillarisetti on 30 June 2015. Breaches of the legal requirements were found. Following the comprehensive inspection, the practice wrote to us to tell us what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches.
We undertook this focussed inspection on 1 March 2016, to check that the practice had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met the legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting ‘all reports’ link for Dr Satish C Pillarisetti on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
People with long term conditions
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people with long-term conditions. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
Families, children and young people
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of families, children and young people. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of older people. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
Working age people (including those recently retired and students)
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of working age people (including those recently retired and students). The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable
Updated
28 April 2016
At our previous comprehensive inspection on 30 June 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe and effective services and good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.
At our focussed follow-up inspection on 1 March 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe and effective services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.