Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Avonside Health Centre on 5 July 2016. As a result of our inspection the practice was rated as good overall but required improvement for providing safe services. The full comprehensive report on the July 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Avonside Health Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was a desk-based focused inspection carried out on 19 September 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breach in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 5 July 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

The practice is now rated as good for providing safe services and its overall rating remains good.

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice had carried out Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for all staff members and had amended their procedures to ensure all future staff recruitment included 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).

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Avonside Health Centre on 5 July 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 well managed with the exception of those relating to non-clinical staff involved in chaperoning activity.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.

However, there was an area of practice where the provider must make improvements.

The provider must:

• Ensure they complete risk assessments to demonstrate the rationale for not carrying out DBS checks for staff acting as chaperones.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Avonside Health Centre in Warwick, is a GP practice with a patient population of 8719. The service is located in a modern, purpose built, two storey building.

New text here

We found the practice was safe, effective, caring, well-led and responsive to patients’ needs. There were systems in place to learn from incidents and respond to safeguarding concerns. The practice was clean. Equipment and medication were fit for purpose and there were appropriate procedures in place to maintain this.

The services provided were designed to promote patients’ health and wellbeing. The practice worked collaboratively with other health providers and took action to manage poor staff performance when necessary.

Patients were listened to and involved by respectful staff. There were appropriate procedures in place to include patients in their care.

Appointments were accessible and arrangements were in place to see patients in their own homes when necessary. The service acted upon patients’ comments and complaints.

An open culture and management structure meant that staff were engaged, understood their objectives and knew about decisions that affected their work. Risks to patients were managed appropriately.

During our inspection we spoke with people who use the service and read comments they left for us. Patients said they received very good care and were positive about most aspects of the service. However, they felt the provision of a routine blood taking service would improve their experience.

We found that the practice proactively engaged with community teams and targeted vaccination programmes to effectively care for older people.

The flexible approach of the nurse led clinics meant that the service was responsive to the needs of people with long term conditions.

Mothers, babies, children and young people were protected because the service had appropriate systems in place to identify and report child protection concerns.

The availability of appointments at set times outside of normal working hours meant that working age people had their needs considered.

Patients whose circumstances may lead them to have poor access to primary medical services were able to register at the practice through the use of temporary resident registration.

The service had procedures in place to assist in keeping people with mental health issues and limited understanding safe.