You are here

Dr Bevan & Partners Good Also known as Fairfield Park Health Centre

Reports


Inspection carried out on 20 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

In February 2016, a comprehensive inspection of Dr Bevan & Partners was conducted. The practice was rated as requires improvement for safe and good for effective, caring, responsive and well led. Overall the practice was rated as good.

We found that the practice required improvement for the provision of safe services because improvements were needed in the way the practice assessed, managed and mitigated the risk associated with the spread of infections and with fire safety.

Dr Bevan and Partners sent us an action plan which set out the changes they would make to improve in these areas.

We carried out an announced desk top inspection of Dr Bevan & Partners on 20 September 2016 to ensure the practice had made these changes and that the service was meeting regulations. At this inspection we rated the practice as good for providing safe services. The overall rating for the practice remains good. For this reason we have only rated the location for the key question to which this related. This report should be read in conjunction with the full inspection report published on 16 February 2016.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice had processes in place to prevent, detect and control the spread of infections, including those that are health care associated.
  • Comprehensive fire risk policies and procedures were in place.
  • Recommended training had been undertaken by practice staff.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 16 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Bevan & Partners on 16 February 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 managed with the exception of those relating to infection control and fire safety.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Assessing the risk of, and preventing, detecting and controlling the spread of infections, including those that are health care associated.

  • Review and update fire risk policies and procedures.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Ensure staff have received mental health capacity training within the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

CQC Insight

These reports bring together existing national data from a range of indicators that allow us to identify and monitor changes in the quality of care outside of our inspections. The data within the reports do not constitute a judgement on performance, but inform our inspection teams. Our judgements on quality and safety continue to come only after inspection and we will not make judgements on data alone. The evidence tables published alongside our inspection reports from April 2018 onwards replace the information contained in these files.