The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Victory House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Sidings, Station Road, Whalley, Clitheroe, Lancashire, BB7 9SE (01200) 427729

Provided and run by:
Dr Mary Adams

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Victory House 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 Victory House, you can give feedback on this service.

18 October 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

Victory House was inspected previously on 7 December 2017. This inspection was undertaken before ratings for the service and each key question were introduced. However, at that inspection we found the service being delivered was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

Following the inspection on 18 October 2022 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 Victory House as part of our inspection programme and to provide the service with a rating. Dr Mary Adams is a single-handed GP who provides an independent GP consulting service to both children and adults.

We spoke with five patients on the telephone and all provided glowing praise for Dr Adams and the service provided by her.

Our key findings were:

  • The service provided care in a way that kept patients safe.

  • There were effective systems in place to protect patients from avoidable harm. Policies and procedures were in place to support the delivery of safe services.

  • The service was provided from a location that was leased from another service on an as required basis. This did provide some challenges which Dr Adams was aware of and was implementing actions to mitigate any potential risks to patients.

  • Dr Adams was appropriately trained and medicines and equipment were available in the event of a medical emergency.

  • There were systems in place for identifying, acting on and learning from incidents, patient safety alerts and complaints.

  • Dr Adams had established effective working relationships with health care professionals working in primary and secondary care.

  • Patients received timely, effective care and treatment that met their needs. Our review of clinical records found appropriate care and treatment was being provided.

  • We saw examples where information was shared with a patient’s NHS GP to support the safe care and treatment and continuity of care.

  • Patients were supported to live healthier lives through education and support.

  • Governance arrangements and quality improvement activity was established to support service improvements and the delivery of safe and effective care.

  • Dr Adams was supported by a personal administrative assistance and evidence was available that demonstrated appropriate training and annual appraisals were undertaken

  • Services available and fees were clearly displayed on the provider’s website.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Proceed with the planned removal of carpeting in the consultation room.
  • Extend monitoring systems for expiry dates to include spill kits and oxygen tubing.
  • Actively encourage and record patient feedback about the quality of care and treatment provided and use this to inform the service’s quality improvement agenda.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

7 December 2017

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 6 November 2017 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out a comprehensive inspection of this service 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 is 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.

Victory House is registered with CQC as a private GP practice, covering Ribble Valley and the wider geographical area. The practice is owned and run by Dr Mary Adams with support from administration staff. The range of services available includes private primary care consultations, examination and management, health screening, chronic disease management, men’s health, women’s health checks and immunisations. The total practice patient population is 400 patients. Appointments can be booked over the phone, in person and by email. These can be booked in advance with emergency slots available on the day. Telephone consultations are available and the practice has extended hours on a Saturday morning.

The clinic is registered with CQC to provide the following regulated activities:

  • Diagnostic and screening procedures
  • Treatment of disease, disorder or injury
  • Surgical procedures
  • Maternity and midwifery services

The provider is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

As part of our inspection we asked for CQC comment cards to be completed by patients prior to our inspection. We received 18 comment cards which were all positive about the standard of care received. Patients said the clinic was always clean, they found it easy to get an appointment and they felt staff were respectful and treated them with dignity. We spoke with two patients during the inspection whose comments aligned with these views.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The clinic had systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with care, compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • The provider offered consultations to anyone who requested and paid the appropriate fee, and did not discriminate against any client group. During our inspection we observed that members of staff were courteous and very helpful to patients and treated them with dignity and respect.
  • Systems were in place to monitor complaints.
  • The service 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 service proactively sought feedback via patient surveys from patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the need for a Legionella risk assessment for the building.
  • Review the information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns that is readily available for patients.