You are here

Archived: Mirfield Health Centre Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall. (The practice was previously inspected on 7 July 2016. On that occasion the practice received a rating of Good overall, with a rating of Outstanding for providing effective services).

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Mirfield Health Centre on 14 February 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear governance policies and protocols which were accessible to all staff.
  • There were well developed systems to identify and manage risk within the practice. Processes for recognising, reporting and learning from incidents were embedded.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided. Care and treatment was delivered in line with current evidence based guidance. The practice benchmarked performance against other practices in the locality.
  • The practice had responded to patient survey results relating to delays in accessing appointments. They had made improvements and changes to their systems; and provided evidence which showed that abandoned calls and call wait times had been significantly reduced; the number of available appointments had significantly increased and waiting times to be seen had reduced in the period between January 2017 and January 2018.
  • We observed staff treating patients with kindness, compassion and good humour. Patients we spoke with confirmed this impression.
  • Staff were encouraged and supported to develop within their role. Staff at all levels were able to access role development opportunities.
  • The practice engaged in a positive way with the local community. Sponsorship was provided for a local girls’ football team, there was reciprocal engagement with the local primary school, and outreach support was provided to a nearby hostel for homeless people.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Improve systems for collating and recording informal verbal complaints and compliments.
  • Improve record keeping associated with the cleaning of equipment.
  • Continue to monitor, review and take steps to improve patient satisfaction in accessing appointments and receiving care.
  • Review their arrangements for the identification of carers to assure themselves that they are identifying them effectively, and are able to offer them the appropriate support.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Effective

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Caring

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Responsive

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Well-led

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Older people

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 9 March 2018

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 9 March 2018