You are here

Reports


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Island Health on 9 September 2021. 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 Island Health, you can give feedback on this service.

Review carried out on 8 October 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Island Health on 8 October 2019. 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.

Inspection carried out on 18 April 2017

During a routine inspection

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 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 Island health 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 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.
  • 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The Extra Care project provided better support to patients that were high attenders at the practice and this had also resulted in a significant reduction in their appointment usage. The success of the approach used had been evaluated over a two year period. The practice had recently won an innovation grant to roll out the approach to other practices.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure all medicines are accounted for and are stored securely at all times.

  • Ensure systems are in place to assess the different responsibilities and activities of staff to determine if they are eligible for a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check and to what level.

  • Ensure systems are embedded so that all information required in respect of each person employed by the service is available and that adequate medical indemnity insurance arrangements are in place.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

Staff were working through a suite of e-learning modules that enabled them to complete training courses at their own pace. A system was not in place however so that the provider could readily track the progress staff were making towards completing all the required training in a timely way.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice