We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Eastfield Medical Centre on 13 March 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

• what we found when we inspected
• information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
• information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

• The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
• The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
• The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

• Review and Improve the process for monitoring significant events to include review of actions and trends.
• Review and Improve the recruitment process.
• Review and improve the process for emergency care plans.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out a comprehensive inspection of Eastfield Medical Centre on 20 November 2014. Eastfield practice provides primary medical care services to patients living in and around the area of Eastfield, North Yorkshire.

We rated the practice overall as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

• The leadership, governance and culture were used to drive and improve the delivery of quality, person-centred care.

• Patients reported good access to the practice and continuity of care, with urgent appointments

available the same day.

• Patients said, and our observations confirmed, they were treated with kindness and respect.

• The practice was visibly clean and tidy.

• The practice learned from incidents and took action to prevent a recurrence.

• The practice safely and effectively provided services for all patient groups. The staff were caring and ensured all treatments being provided followed best practice guidance. The practice was well-led and responsive to patients’ needs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We spoke with the practice manager, a GP and three members of staff as part of this inspection. We checked the recruitment records for three members of staff and the training records of four staff.

At the last inspection we had made compliance actions in respect of requirements relating to workers (recruitment) and supporting workers. At this inspection we saw that there was a new recruitment system in place and it had been used effectively to appoint staff. We saw evidence of this in the staff files and from speaking with staff. There were effective recruitment procedures in place which ensured staff were employed with the appropriate qualifications, skills and experience necessary for them to carry out their role.

The practice had developed individual training programmes for staff and annuals appraisals were in place. Staff had received appropriate professional development and training to ensure they could meet the needs of the patients who used the service. Staff were positive about the support they received, comments included “I’ve had good support” and “I’ve recently had training for fire safety and other training is planned”.

During our announced inspection we spoke with four patients including two people from the medical centre’s patient participation group, a GP, the practice manager, a practice nurse, the cleaning staff and some reception staff.

Patients told us that they were happy with the care and treatment they received and had confidence in the staff. They said “I genuinely feel it is a good practice” and “I think it’s a good service, you can always get seen by a doctor”. Patients expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We saw that staff maintained patients’ privacy and confidentiality.

During our visit we saw that the medical centre looked clean and tidy and there were infection control procedures in place.

People who used the service were at potential risk of receiving care from people who were not considered suitable to work with vulnerable people as effective recruitment procedures and checks had not been undertaken before staff began work. The service did not have suitable arrangements in place to ensure that staff were appropriately supported in relation to their responsibilities because they did not receive appropriate training and supervision.

Staff could tell us who they would contact if they were concerned about child protection issues or abuse of patients. The practice had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that patients received.