We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 28 March 2019 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 services 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 this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

10 Harley Street is a service for adults and carries out home detoxification of alcohol, the services they provide includes:

• Telephone assessment.

• Liaison/collaborating with GP or other primary care services.

• Face to Face assessment with responsible adult.

• Prescription of medication.

• Home visits, telephone support and monitoring for the duration of the detox.

Mr Anthony Jemmott (Registered Nurse) 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.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 for the regulated activities of Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

Our key findings were:

• Systems and processes were in place to keep people safe. The service lead was the lead member of staff for safeguarding and had undertaken adult safeguarding to level two and child safeguarding training to level three. Whilst the provider did not directly provide clinical services for patients under 18 there is an expectation that staff working in a health care setting are trained in child safeguarding in line with the intercollegiate guidance.
• The provider was aware of current evidence based guidance and they had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out his role.
• The provider was aware of their responsibility to respect people’s diversity and human rights.
• Patients were able to access care and treatment from the clinic within an appropriate timescale for their needs.
• There was a complaints procedure in place and information on how to complain was readily available.
• Governance arrangements were in place. There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.
• The service had systems and processes in place to ensure that patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.
• 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 had systems in place to collect and analyse feedback from patients.

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

• Review the process for gathering and analysing patient feedback.
• Review the quality improvement activity and introduce two cycle clinical audits.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care