You are here

Weelsby View Health Centre - Drs Chalmers and Meier Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 21 February 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this practice on 19 May 2016. A breach of legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection the practice wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the following legal requirements set out in the Health and Social Care Act (HSCA) 2008:

Regulation 19 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Fit and proper persons employed Regulation 19 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014:

Fit and proper persons employed

How the regulation was not being met:

Recruitment arrangements did not include all necessary employment checks for all staff.

Regulation 19(3)(a) schedule 3

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 21 February 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 19 May 2016. This report covers our findings in relation only to those requirements.

The full comprehensive report on the Month Year inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Bartholomew Medical Group on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 19 May 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Weelsby View Health Centre, Drs Chalmers and Meier on 19 May 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were generally assessed and managed, with the exception of those relating to employment checks undertaken on clinical staff.

  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • 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 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.
  • The practice had policies and procedures to govern activity.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The area where the provider must make improvement is:

  • To ensure that all necessary employment checks, or in the absence of an employment check a risk assessment to support the decision, should be undertaken on all clinical staff.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • To ensure that information for patients, in practice leaflets and on the website, on how they can access services is accurate, consistent and comprehensive. For example including details of the times that late appointments were available on a Monday evening.

  • To ensure that a Patient Participation Group is established.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 29 October 2013

During a routine inspection

Patients expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. A GP told us, “I always discuss treatment options with my patients. Offering time to answer any questions they have and can print information for them to take away with them.”

Patients were happy about the care and treatment they received. A patient we spoke with said, “The doctor is always helpful and friendly” and “He is easy to talk to and communicates well.” Another person told us, “I am really happy with the surgery and confident about the advice they give me.”

The practice manager confirmed that one of the practice nurses was the infection control lead. He also said, “The practice receives support from the clinical commissioning group (CCG) specialist lead who also helps us with training and audits.”

The practice supported staff development and facilitated a range of training requested by clinical staff. However, there was no overall training matrix or future plan in place for essential training.

A suggestion box was clearly displayed near the reception desk to obtain suggestions and feedback from patients. The practice manager told us, “We have sent out questionnaires in the past and that is something we will look to do again in the near future.”

CQC Insight

These reports bring together existing national data from a range of indicators that allow us to identify and monitor changes in the quality of care outside of our inspections. The data within the reports do not constitute a judgement on performance, but inform our inspection teams. Our judgements on quality and safety continue to come only after inspection and we will not make judgements on data alone. The evidence tables published alongside our inspection reports from April 2018 onwards replace the information contained in these files.