You are here

Al-Shifa Medical Centre Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection 1 December 2015 – Good)

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

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Al Shifa Surgery on 9 May 2018. This inspection was carried out under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. The inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • Safety systems were comprehensive and actions were taken to prevent incidents and risks to patients. We noted that portable acceptance testing and fire risk assessments required updating and some recruitment information was not present.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines, however we noted some patient notes had not been fully coded.
  • Clinicians had access to appropriate information to deliver safe care and treatment.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported they were able to access care when they needed it. Patient feedback on the care and treatment delivered by all staff was overwhelmingly positive.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation

We saw one areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice operated a “safe surgery” principle in partnership with “Doctors of the world”. This aimed to offer healthcare and treatment to anyone regardless of their immigration status, race, gender, sexuality or other characteristic. Staff had received training on specific barriers faced by vulnerable groups and how to mitigate these barriers and provided access to care for patients who otherwise may have been fearful.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Document recruitment information more fully.
  • Improve process for comprehensively coding patient notes.
  • Improve processes for ensuring portable appliance testing and fire risk assessments are completed in a timely manner.
  • Improve the system/process for monitoring higher risk medicines.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

We rated the practice as good for providing safe services.

Safety systems and processes

The practice had clear systems to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.

  • The practice had appropriate systems to safeguard children and vulnerable adults from abuse. All staff received up-to-date safeguarding and safety training appropriate to their role. They knew how to identify and report concerns. Reports and learning from safeguarding incidents were available to staff. Staff who acted as chaperones were trained for their role and had received a DBS check. (DBS checks identify whether a person has a criminal record or is on an official list of people barred from working in roles where they may have contact with children or adults who may be vulnerable.)
  • Staff took steps, including working with other agencies, to protect patients from abuse, neglect, harassment, discrimination and breaches of their dignity and respect.
  • The practice carried out appropriate staff checks at the time of recruitment and on an ongoing basis. We noted that some of the checks had not been retained in the recruitment files, for example medical declarations and interview notes.
  • There was an effective system to manage infection prevention and control.
  • The practice had arrangements to ensure that facilities and equipment were safe and in good working order.
  • Arrangements for managing waste and clinical specimens kept people safe.

Risks to patients

There were systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient safety.

  • Arrangements were in place for planning and monitoring the number and mix of staff needed to meet patients’ needs, including planning for holidays, sickness, busy periods and epidemics.
  • There was an effective induction system for temporary staff tailored to their role.
  • The practice was equipped to deal with medical emergencies and staff were suitably trained in emergency procedures. Two recommended emergency medicines had expired, the provider was awaiting delivery of replacements, and we were informed six days after inspection that these had been delivered.
  • Staff understood their responsibilities to manage emergencies on the premises and to recognise those in need of urgent medical attention. Clinicians knew how to identify and manage patients with severe infections including sepsis.
  • When there were changes to services or staff the practice assessed and monitored the impact on safety.

Information to deliver safe care and treatment

Staff had the information they needed to deliver safe care and treatment to patients.

  • The care records we saw showed that information needed to deliver safe care and treatment was available to staff. There was a documented approach to managing test results.
  • The practice had systems for sharing information with staff and other agencies to enable them to deliver safe care and treatment.
  • Clinicians made timely referrals in line with protocols.

Appropriate and safe use of medicines

The practice had reliable systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines.

  • The systems for managing and storing medicines, including vaccines, medical gases, emergency medicines and equipment, minimised risks.
  • Staff prescribed, administered or supplied medicines to patients and gave advice on medicines in line with current national guidance. The practice had reviewed its antibiotic prescribing and taken action to support good antimicrobial stewardship in line with local and national guidance.
  • Patients’ health was monitored in relation to the use of medicines and followed up on appropriately. Patients were involved in regular reviews of their medicines. We noted that the review of patients recieveing some higher risk medications were not always up to date. This was discussed with the lead GP who agreed that further improvement of the system for reviewing these medicines would be introduced.

Track record on safety

The practice had a good track record on safety.

  • There were comprehensive risk assessments in relation to safety issues, we noted that there had been no fire risk assessment for several years, when this was brought to the attention of the lead GP, they arranged for one to be conducted. Six days after inspection we were sent confirmation that a comprehensive risk assessment by an authorised contractor had been completed. We were told portable appliance testing (PAT) had been completed but were shown no evidence of this, we were later sent evidence of comprehensive PAT testing as having been completed.
  • The practice monitored and reviewed activity. This helped it to understand risks and gave a clear, accurate and current picture of safety that led to safety improvements.

Lessons learned and improvements made

The practice learned/ and made improvements when things went wrong.

  • Staff understood their duty to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. Leaders and managers supported them when they did so.
  • There were systems for reviewing and investigating when things went wrong. The practice learned and shared lessons, identified themes and took action to improve safety in the practice. For example when a patient attempted to gain additional medicines when already having received the appropriate amount.
  • The practice acted on and learned from external safety events as well as patient and medicine safety alerts.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Effective

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

We rated the practice and all of the population groups as good for providing effective services overall

(Please note: Any Quality Outcomes (QOF) data relates to 2016/17. QOF is a system intended to improve the quality of general practice and reward good practice.)

Effective needs assessment, care and treatment

The practice had systems to keep clinicians up to date with current evidence-based practice. We saw that clinicians assessed needs and delivered care and treatment in line with current legislation, standards and guidance supported by clear clinical pathways and protocols.

  • Patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. This included their clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing.
  • We saw no evidence of discrimination when making care and treatment decisions.
  • Staff used appropriate tools to assess the level of pain in patients.
  • Staff advised patients what to do if their condition got worse and where to seek further help and support.
  • We noted from patient records that some minor conditions were not routinely coded on patient notes. We discussed this with the GPs and they agreed that there were benefits to doing this.

Older people:

  • Older patients who are frail or may be vulnerable received a full assessment of their physical, mental and social needs. The practice used an appropriate tool to identify patients aged 65 and over who were living with moderate or severe frailty. Those identified as being frail had a clinical review including a review of medication.
  • Patients aged over 75 were invited for a health check. If necessary they were referred to other services such as voluntary services and supported by an appropriate care plan.
  • The practice followed up on older patients discharged from hospital. It ensured that their care plans and prescriptions were updated to reflect any extra or changed needs.
  • Staff had appropriate knowledge of treating older people including their psychological, mental and communication needs.
  • GPs under took regular home visits at the homes of older people who could not attend the surgery and took pride in knowing all their elderly patients.
  • The practice had completed work on advanced care planning and an audit revealed they had increased their performance in this area by over 100% in the last year. Thirty minute appointments were scheduled with patients to discuss advanced care planning.

People with long-term conditions:

  • Patients with long-term conditions had a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For patients with the most complex needs, the GP worked with other health and care professionals to deliver a coordinated package of care.
  • Staff who were responsible for reviews of patients with long-term conditions had received specific training. GPs would routinely conduct opportunistic testing, for example foot checks and blood tests avoiding the need for an additional appointment with the practice nurse.
  • GPs followed up patients who had received treatment in hospital or through out of hours services.
  • The practice had arrangements for adults with newly diagnosed cardiovascular disease including the offer of high‑intensity statins for secondary prevention, people with suspected hypertension were offered ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and patients with atrial fibrillation were assessed for stroke risk and treated as appropriate.
  • The practice was able to demonstrate how they identified patients with commonly undiagnosed conditions, for example diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), atrial fibrillation and hypertension. Due to the demographics of the patient population (high levels of patients from Asia) the practice concentrated heavily on diabetes diagnosis and treatment. The newly appointed nurse told us that she saw this as one of her main priorities.

Families, children and young people:

  • Childhood immunisations were carried out in line with the national childhood vaccination programme. Uptake rates for the vaccines given were in line with the target percentage of 90%. The GPs were flexible in appointment times and routinely saw school aged patients outside normal practice hours to provide treatment and vaccinations.
  • The practice had arrangements to identify and review the treatment of newly pregnant women on long-term medicines. These patients were provided with advice and post-natal support in accordance with best practice guidance together with an eight week check (with a GP) and baby immunisation on the same day. These clinics were generally held on a Wednesday morning, however if this was not convenient appointments were made available to suit mothers.
  • The practice had safeguarding arrangements in place for following up failed attendance of children’s appointments following an appointment in secondary care.
  • The practice promoted the “Champ” service which helped advise and support children who may have been overweight.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students):

  • The practice’s uptake for cervical screening below the 80% coverage target for the national screening programme. We spoke with the practice about this, they were aware of the issue which is related to the ethnicity of many of the female patients. The practice was working hard to promote the benefits of cervical screening.
  • The practice’s uptake for breast and bowel cancer screening was in line the national average.
  • The practice had systems to inform eligible patients to have the meningitis vaccine, for example before attending university for the first time.
  • Patients had access to appropriate health assessments and checks including NHS checks for patients aged 40-74.
  • Patients affected by ill health, whether physical or mental, support was offered to help the person get back into work. This was done by the support of the GP and also via access to the “Fit for Work” service.

People whose circumstances make them vulnerable:

  • End of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of those whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. Extensive work had been done on advanced care planning.
  • Regular multi-disciplinary meetings (MDTs) took place to discuss patients nearing the end of life.
  • The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people, female patients living in refuges, illegal immigrants and those with a learning disability.
  • The practice had a system for vaccinating patients with an underlying medical condition according to the recommended schedule.
  • The practice had utilised the Training and Support for Services and Exiles (ts4se) resource pack to help support the migrant population as a vulnerable group of patients. This had been accessed by all staff and used to make vulnerable patients feel welcome and safe at the practice.
  • Female patients from the local refuge regularly met with one of the GPs, who could speak Bengali and offered assistance and support to these vulnerable women who are often single mothers and the victims of Domestic Violence.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia):

  • The practice assessed and monitored the physical health of people with mental illness, severe mental illness, and personality disorder by providing access to health checks, interventions for physical activity, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer and access to ‘stop smoking’ services. There was a system for following up patients who failed to attend for administration of long term medication; this was managed by the reception staff in a call/re-call system.
  • The number of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the previous 12 months was above the national average at 100%.
  • The number of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the previous 12 months was above to the national average.
  • The practice specifically considered the physical health needs of patients with poor mental health and those living with dementia. For example, the number of patients experiencing poor mental health who had received discussion and advice about alcohol consumption was above to the national average.
  • Patients at risk of dementia were identified and offered an assessment to detect possible signs of dementia. When dementia was suspected there was an appropriate referral for diagnosis.
  • The practice offered annual health checks to patients with a learning disability.

Monitoring care and treatment

The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity and routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided. For example the practice worked with the clinical commissioning group (CCG) pharmacists in medicines optimisation projects. Where appropriate, clinicians took part in local and national improvement initiatives.

  • QOF results were comparable to CCG and national averages. Any Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data relates to 2016/17. QOF is a system intended to improve the quality of general practice and reward good practice.)
  • Some patient exception reporting was higher than local and national averages, for example for mental health and cervical screening. We looked at the reasons for these rates and were provided with appropriate evidence as to the decision making around the figures. Exception reporting is the removal of patients from QOF calculations where, for example, the patients decline or do not respond to invitations to attend a review of their condition or when a medicine is not appropriate
  • The practice used information about care and treatment to make improvements.
  • The practice was actively involved in quality improvement activity. Where appropriate, clinicians took part in local and national improvement initiatives.

Effective staffing

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.

  • Staff had appropriate knowledge for their role, for example, to carry out reviews for people with long-term conditions, older people and people requiring contraceptive reviews.
  • Staff whose role included immunisation and taking samples for the cervical screening programme had received specific training and could demonstrate how they stayed up to date.
  • The practice understood the learning needs of staff and provided protected time and training to meet them. The newly appointed practice nurse was experienced and worked at another service in the area, bringing new ideas and practices for discussion. Up to date records of skills, qualifications and training were maintained. Staff were encouraged and given opportunities to develop.
  • The practice provided staff with ongoing support. This included an induction process, one-to-one meetings, appraisals, coaching and mentoring, clinical supervision and support for revalidation.
  • There was a clear approach for supporting and managing staff when their performance was poor or variable.

Coordinating care and treatment

Staff worked together and with other health and social care professionals to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • We saw records that showed that all appropriate staff, including those in different teams and organisations, were involved in assessing, planning and delivering care and treatment.
  • The practice shared clear and accurate information with relevant professionals when deciding care delivery for people with long term conditions and when coordinating healthcare for care home residents. The shared information with, and liaised with community services, social services and carers for housebound patients and with health visitors and community services for children who had relocated into the local area.
  • Patients received coordinated and person-centred care. This included when they moved between services, when they were referred, or after they were discharged from hospital. The practice worked with patients to develop personal care plans that were shared with relevant agencies.
  • The practice ensured that end of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of different patients, including those who may be vulnerable because of their circumstances.

Helping patients to live healthier lives

Staff were consistent and proactive in helping patients to live healthier lives.

  • The practice identified patients who may be in need of extra support and directed them to relevant services. This included patients in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and carers. There was information in the waiting room signposting patients to support services.
  • Staff encouraged and supported patients to be involved in monitoring and managing their own health, for example through social prescribing schemes and suggesting alternative health options.
  • Staff discussed changes to care or treatment with patients and their carers as necessary.
  • The practice supported national priorities and initiatives to improve the population’s health, for example, stop smoking campaigns and tackling obesity.

Consent to care and treatment

The practice obtained consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance.

  • Clinicians understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making.
  • Clinicians supported patients to make decisions. Where appropriate, they assessed and recorded a patient’s mental capacity to make a decision.
  • The practice monitored the process for seeking consent appropriately.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Caring

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

We rated the practice as good for caring.

Kindness, respect and compassion

Staff treated patients with kindness, respect and compassion.

  • Feedback from patients was positive about the way staff treat people.
  • Staff understood patients’ personal, cultural, social and religious needs.
  • The practice gave patients timely support and information.

Involvement in decisions about care and treatment

Staff helped patients to be involved in decisions about care and treatment. They were aware of the Accessible Information Standard (a requirement to make sure patients and their carers can access and understand the information that they are given.)

  • Staff communicated with people in a way that they could understand, for example, communication aids and easy read materials were available.
  • Staff helped patients and their carers find further information and access community and advocacy services. They helped them ask questions about their care and treatment.
  • The practice proactively identified carers and supported them.

Privacy and dignity

The practice respected patients’ privacy and dignity.

  • Reception staff knew that if patients wanted to discuss sensitive issues or appeared distressed they could offer them a private room to discuss their needs.
  • Staff recognised the importance of people’s dignity and respect. They challenged behaviour that fell short of this. Staff took pride in knowing their patients, the relatively small patient list made this more achievable.
  • Staff we spoke with told us that they had never seen any inappropriate behaviour or language by staff during the time they had worked there.
  • Patients we spoke with gave very positive feedback about the caring nature of the GPs at the practice.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Responsive

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

We rated the practice, and all of the population groups, as good for providing responsive services

.

Responding to and meeting people’s needs

The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. It took account of patient needs and preferences.

  • The practice understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs.
  • Telephone GP consultations were available which supported patients who were unable to attend the practice during normal working hours.
  • The facilities and premises were appropriate for the services delivered.
  • The practice made reasonable adjustments when patients found it hard to access services.
  • The practice provided effective care coordination for patients who are more vulnerable or who have complex needs. They supported them to access services both within and outside the practice.
  • Care and treatment for patients with multiple long-term conditions and patients approaching the end of life was coordinated with other services.

Older people:

  • All patients had a named GP who supported them in whatever setting they lived, whether it was at home or a supported living scheme.
  • The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs. The GP also accommodated home visits for those who had difficulties getting to the practice due to transport availability.

People with long-term conditions:

  • Patients with a long-term condition received an annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being appropriately met. Multiple conditions were reviewed at one appointment, and consultation times were flexible to meet each patient’s specific needs.
  • The practice held regular meetings with the local district nursing team to discuss and manage the needs of patients with complex medical issues.
  • The practice nurse and GPs undertook regular asthma, chronic pulmonary heart disease (COPD) and diabetes reviews and worked closely with the community COPD team to identify patients at risk of exacerbations and provide education and rescue packs to those at risk.

Families, children and young people:

  • We found there some systems to identify and follow up children living in disadvantaged circumstances, including children and young people who had a high number of accident and emergency (A&E) attendances.
  • All parents or guardians calling with concerns about a child under the age of 18 were offered a same day appointment regardless of circumstances.
  • The practice had a good uptake for childhood immunisations and this was monitored regularly for recall and non-attendance. The practice recently conducted an audit on how this can be further improved.
  • The practice offered GP led ante-natal clinics.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students):

  • The needs of this population group had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care. For example, extended opening hours, online access, use of local services to prevent secondary admissions. The practice was part of the South Manchester GP Federation which provided services for patients from 8am to 8pm seven days a week, giving access to GPs, nurses and health care assistants (HCA).
  • Flexible flu immunisations were offered to patients who could not attend during office hours.

People whose circumstances make them vulnerable:

  • The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people, illegal immigrants and patients living is refuges as well as those with a learning disability.
  • People in vulnerable circumstances were easily able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode.
  • Al- Shifa Medical Centre is a member of the “Safe Surgery Network”. This is a national project to support healthcare access for the vulnerable and migrant population and allows patients to register safely without concern that their details may be passed on to Home Office Representatives.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia):

  • Staff interviewed had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and those patients living with dementia.
  • Patients who failed to attend appointments were proactively followed up by a phone call from practice staff

Timely access to care and treatment

Patients were able to access care and treatment from the practice within an acceptable timescale for their needs.

  • Patients had timely access to initial assessment, test results, diagnosis and treatment.
  • Waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately.
  • Patients with the most urgent needs had their care and treatment prioritised.
  • Patients reported that the appointment system was easy to use.
  • The practice was working to introduce and promote new technology to assist access to appointments and reduce failures to attend appointments (DNAs).
  • The national patient survey indicated that patients were very satisfied with access to appointments and the responsiveness of the practice, it scored above the local and national averages in the questions relating to that area of care.

Listening and learning from concerns and complaints

The practice took complaints and concerns seriously and responded to them appropriately to improve the quality of care.

  • Information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns was available. Staff treated patients who made complaints compassionately.
  • The complaint policy and procedures were in line with recognised guidance. The practice learned lessons from individual concerns and complaints and also from analysis of trends. It acted as a result to improve the quality of care. For example complaints relating to medication issues resulted in a review and update of patients who may over request prescriptions.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Well-led

Good

Updated 11 June 2018

We rated the practice as good for providing a well-led service.

Leadership capacity and capability

Leaders had/ the capacity and skills to deliver high-quality, sustainable care.

  • Leaders were knowledgeable about issues and priorities relating to the quality and future of services. They understood the challenges and were addressing them.
  • Leaders at all levels were visible and approachable. They worked closely with staff and others to make sure they prioritised compassionate and inclusive leadership. Staff told us it was a pleasure to work at the practice and they looked forward to coming to work.
  • The practice had effective processes to develop leadership capacity and skills, including planning for the future leadership of the practice.

Vision and strategy

The practice had a clear vision and credible strategy to deliver high quality, sustainable care.

  • There was a clear vision and set of values. The practice had a realistic strategy and supporting business plans to achieve priorities. The practice developed its vision, values and strategy jointly with patients, staff and external partners. The practice had a patient charter which was publicised and which staff were aware of their part in achieving.
  • Staff were aware of and understood the vision, values and strategy and their role in achieving them.
  • The strategy was in line with health and social priorities across the region. The practice planned its services to meet the needs of the practice population.
  • The practice monitored progress against delivery of the strategy.

Culture

The practice had a culture of high-quality sustainable care.

  • Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. They were proud to work in the practice.
  • The practice focused on the needs of patients.
  • Leaders and managers acted on behaviour and performance inconsistent with the vision and values.
  • Openness, honesty and transparency were demonstrated when responding to incidents and complaints. The provider was aware of and had systems to ensure compliance with the requirements of the duty of candour.

  • Staff we spoke with told us they were able to raise concerns and were encouraged to do so. They had confidence that these would be addressed.
  • There were processes for providing all staff with the development they need. This included appraisal and career development conversations. All staff received regular annual appraisals in the last year. Staff were supported to meet the requirements of professional revalidation where necessary.
  • Clinical staff were considered valued members of the practice team. They were given protected time for professional development and evaluation of their clinical work.
  • There was a strong emphasis on the safety and well-being of all staff.
  • The practice actively promoted equality and diversity. Staff had received equality and diversity training. Staff felt they were treated equally.
  • There were positive relationships between staff and teams.
  • The practice managers were aware of cultural and social issues within the practice list and had provided appropriate and well thought out training to enable staff to deliver high quality and inclusive care.

Governance arrangements

There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

  • Structures, processes and systems to support good governance and management were clearly set out, understood and effective. The governance and management of partnerships, joint working arrangements and shared services promoted interactive and co-ordinated person-centred care.
  • Staff were clear on their roles and accountabilities including in respect of safeguarding and infection prevention and control.
  • Practice leaders had established proper policies, procedures and activities to ensure safety and assured themselves that they were operating as intended.

Managing risks, issues and performance

There were mostly clear and effective processes for managing risks, issues and performance.

  • There was an effective, process to identify, understand, monitor and address current and future risks including risks to patient safety. Two risk assessments were outdated (Fire and portable appliance testing). However both these risk assessments were completed with a few days of the issue being identified.
  • The practice had processes to manage current and future performance. Performance of employed clinical staff could be demonstrated through audit of their consultations, prescribing and referral decisions. Practice leaders had oversight of national and local safety alerts, incidents, and complaints.
  • Clinical audit had a positive impact on quality of care and outcomes for patients. There was clear evidence of action to change practice to improve quality, for example advanced care planning.
  • The practice had plans in place and had trained staff for major incidents.
  • The practice implemented service developments and where efficiency changes were made this was with input from clinicians to understand their impact on the quality of care.

Appropriate and accurate information

The practice acted on appropriate and accurate information.

  • Quality and operational information was used to ensure and improve performance. Performance information was combined with the views of patients.
  • Quality and sustainability were discussed in relevant meetings where all staff had sufficient access to information.
  • The practice used performance information which was reported and monitored and management and staff were held to account.
  • The information used to monitor performance and the delivery of quality care was accurate and useful. There were plans to address any identified weaknesses including plans to improve and extend the current building.
  • The practice used information technology systems to monitor and improve the quality of care.
  • The practice submitted data or notifications to external organisations as required.
  • There were robust arrangements in line with data security standards for the availability, integrity and confidentiality of patient identifiable data, records and data management systems.

Engagement with patients, the public, staff and external partners

The practice involved patients, the public, staff and external partners to support high-quality sustainable services.

  • A full and diverse range of patients’, staff and external partners’ views and concerns were encouraged, heard and acted on to shape services and culture. There was an active and engaged patient participation group.
  • The service was transparent, collaborative and open with stakeholders about performance.

Continuous improvement and innovation

There were systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation.

  • There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement. The practice had recognised the impact of a planned retirement of a long serving and well respected GP and had made plans to reduce the impact of this.
  • Staff knew about improvement methods and had the skills to use them.
  • The practice made use of internal and external reviews of incidents and complaints. Learning was shared and used to make improvements.
  • Leaders and managers encouraged staff to take time out to review individual and team objectives, processes and performance.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Families, children and young people

Good

Older people

Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good