You are here

Archived: Clover Health Centre Requires improvement Also known as Greenwich Primary Care Collaborative CIC

The provider of this service changed - see new profile


Inspection carried out on 22 November 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Requires Improvement overall. The practice was previously inspected on 10 December 2014 when the service was rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Requires improvement

Are services caring? – Requires improvement

Are services responsive? – Requires improvement

Are services well-led? - Requires improvement

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Requires improvement

People with long-term conditions – Requires improvement

Families, children and young people – Requires improvement

Working age people (including those retired and students – Requires improvement

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Requires improvement

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Requires improvement

We carried out this announced comprehensive inspection at Clover Health Centre on 22 November 2017 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had 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. However, minutes of meetings where incidents were discussed, were not sufficiently detailed to ensure learning was shared effectively with all staff.
  • Staff we spoke to knew how to identify and report safeguarding concerns. However, not all staff had received up-to-date safeguarding training appropriate to their role, including the safeguarding lead who did not have training in adult safeguarding.
  • The practice did not keep records of essential training for all staff, such as training in fire safety, infection control and safeguarding.
  • There were procedures in place to manage infection prevention and control; however, there was no cleaning schedule in place against which cleaning standards were monitored.
  • There was a system for receiving and acting on safety alerts, such as those provided by MHRA (Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency). However, the system in place was not sufficient to guarantee appropriate action was always taken when required.
  • Patient Group Directions (PGDs) had been adopted by the practice to allow nurses to administer medicines in line with legislation. However, some PGDs had not been signed by all relevant staff.
  • The most recent published Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) results (2016/17) showed the practice performance rates for a number of indicators were below the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) and national average.
  • The practice’s uptake rate for cervical screening was 62%, which was below the CCG average of 79% and national average of 81%.
  • The results from the annual national GP patient survey published in July 2017 showed that patients did not feel they were always treated with care and concern. Practice satisfaction scores were below average for most indicators regarding consultations with GPs and nurses.
  • The practice had identified only 10 patients as carers (0.16% of the practice list).
  • Results from the annual national GP patient survey published in July 2017 showed that patients’ satisfaction with how they could access care and treatment was below the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) and national averages. This was supported by comments from patients on the day of the inspection.
  • Structures, processes and systems to support the management of good governance were in place and generally understood but procedures were not always formalised.
  • The practice did not have an active patient participation group.

There are areas where the provider must make improvements, as they are in breach of regulations:

  • The provider must ensure that persons employed in the provision of regulated activities receive the appropriate training to enable them to carry out their duties.
  • The provider must improve patient outcomes by implementing a clinical quality improvement programme which includes monitoring performance against the Quality and Outcomes Framework.
  • The provider must review the results of patient surveys in order to identify and implement the necessary action required to improve patient satisfaction.
  • The provider must ensure that there is an effective procedure in place for the processing of patient safety alerts, such as those produced by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
  • The provider must ensure Patient Group Directions (PGDs) are signed by all relevant personnel.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • The provider should revise their process for recording minutes for significant event analysis meetings to include all relevant details to ensure learning and necessary improvements are identified and shared with all staff.
  • The provider should monitor cleaning standards on a regular basis.
  • The provider should continue to monitor the practice uptake rate for cervical screening to make improvements as appropriate.
  • The provider should review the effectiveness of policies and procedures and monitor adherence to systems and processes.
  • The provider should review how patients with caring responsibilities are identified and recorded on the clinical system to ensure information, advice and support is made available to all carers registered with the practice.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 10 December 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Clover Health Centre on 10 December 2014. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing well-led, safe, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for the population groups: Older people; People with long-term conditions; Families, children and young people; Working age people (including those recently retired and students); People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable; and People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and were being met.
  • Patients said staff were caring, they were treated dignity and respect, and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice was making it easier for patients to make an appointment with a named GP and patients said the regular doctors and nurses provided continuity of care. Urgent appointments were 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 acted on feedback from patients and staff.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice worked with Public Health to put in place a Somali health advocate to support women whose circumstances made them vulnerable to access services. It had improved its cervical screening rate notwithstanding the challenges of serving a highly mobile population.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider must

  • Assure itself that the building’s landlord is taking the necessary steps to reduce the risk of Legionella infection to staff and patients.

Put in place a schedule of routine maintenance, testing and recalibration for all the practice equipment to mitigate the risk of this activity not being picked up once warranties expired.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice