We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 30 July 2018 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.

This service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of service and these are set out in Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The service is registered for the provision of treatment, advice or surgery by a medical practitioner. The aesthetic cosmetic treatments that are also provided are exempt by law from CQC regulation. Therefore, we were only able to inspect the provision of advice and treatment and not the aesthetic cosmetic services.

We received 49 Care Quality Commission comment cards. These were positive regarding the environment, staff, efficiency of service, care delivered and the caring attitude of the provider. Many clients stated that the service was professional, and that staff took time to explain the process to them. They found the provider professional and would recommend the service to others.

Our key findings were:

• The service was offered on a private, fee paying basis and was accessible to people who chose to use it. Some services were provided on behalf of NHS services. For example, laser hair removal.
• Procedures were safely managed and there were effective levels of patient support and aftercare advice.
• There were systems, processes and practices in place to safeguard clients from abuse.
• Information for service users was comprehensive and accessible. Staff had the relevant skills, knowledge and experience to deliver the care and treatment offered by the service.
• The service encouraged and valued feedback from service users via in-house surveys and the website.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review systems to monitor and record medicine checks, concerns and incidents
• Review processes to keep policies in date.

Breezecott Clinic is an independent health care clinic that provided a range of non-surgical cosmetic treatments and aesthetic procedures for skin rejuvenation.

We toured the clinic. We spoke with the registered manager and the practice manager.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

We saw that equipment used was serviced regularly meaning it was providing accurate treatments.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to provide the treatments the service offered.

People who used the service were protected against the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment as records were updated and stored securely in order to protect people’s confidentiality.

Patients we spoke with were all positive about the way they had been treated. For example, one patient described the service as "absolutely brilliant". Another said;" It's excellent, that's why I have come back again." Patients said that staff had treated them with respect and provided support and reassurance throughout the process. Patients also described the clinic environment as "very clean".

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Overall staff received training and support to deliver care and treatment safely to patients.

Overall people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

There were systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others