You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Island Health on 19 May 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report published on 27 July 2016 can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Island Health on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 18 April 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. There were concerns relating to the management and storeage of medicines, staff training, medical indeminity insurance and the assesments of staff who may require Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and to what level. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as Good.

Our key findings 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 assessed and well managed.
  • Safety systems and processes were embedded, with the exception of those relating to medicines storage and recruitment.
  • 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.

At our previous inspection on 19 May 2016, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services as not all medicines were accounted for, there was a member of staff employed who did not have valid medical indemnity insurance and not all staff had Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks consummate to their roles. At this inspection we found that all medicines were stored appropriately and accounted for, all clinical staff had the appropriate medical indemnity insurance and the practice had developed a DBS protocol which risk assessed staff according to their role which then determined the level of DBS or if it was required.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The practice is rated as good for providing safe services.

  • From the sample of documented examples we reviewed, we found there was an effective system for reporting and recording significant events; lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice. When things went wrong patients were informed as soon as practicable, received reasonable support, truthful information, and a written apology. They were told about any actions to improve processes to prevent the same thing happening again.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Staff demonstrated that they understood their responsibilities and all had received training on safeguarding children and vulnerable adults relevant to their role.
  • The practice had adequate arrangements to respond to emergencies and major incidents.
  • All medicines were stored securely.
  • The practice ensured all recruitment checks were up to date including DBS checks and ensure staff medical indemnity was current.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

Caring

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Older people

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety identified at our inspection on 19 May 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.