The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Fernlea Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

114 High Road, South Tottenham, London, N15 6JR (020) 8809 6445

Provided and run by:
Fernlea Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Fernlea Surgery on 6 July 2023. 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 Fernlea Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

3 December 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the Fernlea Surgery (the practice) on 3 December 2019 as part of our inspection programme, following our annual review of the information available to us. The practice had last been inspected in July 2016, when we had rated it Good for all key questions and population groups. Our previous inspection report can be found by going to https://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-542627206 and selecting the Reports tab.

At this inspection we have rated the practice as Good overall and in respect of the five key questions and six population groups.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to with efforts to improve the uptake of cervical screening and childhood immunisation rates and implement action to bring about and sustain improvement.
  • Proceed with reviewing the system for following up patients given two-week referrals for secondary care.
  • Proceed with establishing a formal process to monitor prescriptions uncollected by patients experiencing poor mental health.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

20 July 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Fernlea Surgery on 20 July 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • To continue to look at ways of improving cervical screening uptake at the practice.
  • To review the National GP Patient Survey results to identify how the practice can improve patient satisfaction scores which are below local and national averages.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

8 July 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

During our last inspection on 31 December 2013 we noted that the provider had not taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent it from happening. All staff had received child protection training, however most staff had not received training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. The practice's policies such as safeguarding vulnerable adults and the whistleblowing policy also required updating with contact details of external organisations for staff to approach.

At this inspection we found that the provider had taken action to ensure that most staff had received training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults, and that the policies for safeguarding vulnerable adults and whistleblowing had been updated.

During our inspection the practice had developed a water leak in one consulting room and a corridor. The practice had dealt with the unforeseen emergency by alerting the landlords to the emergency, monitoring the area and taking action to ensure patients were notified of the situation and seen in an alternative room.

31 December 2013

During a routine inspection

People who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. One person told us 'Yes, they explain everything. I had a back problem and the doctor gave me leaflets explaining the main cause of the pain'. The patients we spoke to on the day of the inspection told us they were happy with their care and treatment. They told us it was sometimes difficult to get through on the telephone to make an appointment, but once they arrived at the surgery they did not usually have to wait long to be seen.

People who use the service were not protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had not taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and reduce the risk of it happening. All staff had received training in child safeguarding. However some staff had not carried out vulnerable adult safeguarding which meant their understanding of the issues about this was limited.

Staff received appropriate professional development. Staff told us they felt supported and encouraged to do further training. We reviewed five staff records which showed that staff had undergone formal training in courses such as customer care and learning disability in 2013.

There was an effective complaints system available. We reviewed four recent complaints and found they had been investigated and responded to appropriately.