We spoke with five patients who told us that they were treated well and felt that they were sufficiently involved in decisions about their treatment. One patient told us, “The staff are always polite and friendly.” Another patient said, “I have seen the GPs and nurses here and they clearly talk through what happens next and what options are available.” We found that people who used the service were involved in their care and treatment and were treated with dignity and respect.

All the patients spoken with were happy with the treatment they received. One patient said, “I try not to come in very often but when I do they always sort me and the kids out.” Another patient said, “I always feel safe here and yes so far I have been pleased with the treatment I have received.” We found that treatment was delivered in a way which ensured that patients were safe and their needs were met.

We found that staff training was up to date and staff received regular appraisals. Staff told us they were working in a very supportive environment.

We found there were effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection 13 May 2015 – Good)

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

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at McKenzie House Practice on 24 January 2018. The reason for the inspection was as part of our inspection programme. We also visited the two branch sites on 25 January 2018. Additional supporting information was received following the inspection.

At this inspection we found:

• The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.

• The practice was open and transparent, and had systems in place to adhere to the Duty of Candour.

• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.

• Quality improvement was embedded into the practice.There was a comprehensive programme of clinical audit which was used to measure improvements to patient care.

• The practice displayed a strong commitment to multidisciplinary working and could evidence how this positively impacted on individual patient care.

• Discussion with staff and feedback from patients showed that staff were highly motivated to deliver care that was respectful, kind and caring.

• The practice organised and delivered their services to meet the needs of their patient population.They were proactive in understanding the needs of the different patient groups.

• The practice demonstrated a clear commitment to developing increased skill mix within all staff teams and there was clear evidence of the upskilling of staff.

• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

• The practice had developed effective multi-disciplinary working arrangements for identifying and supporting more complex patients. We saw evidence from minutes of meetings involving among others; Social Services, Cleveland Constabulary, Hartlepool and North Tees NHS Trust. We saw agreed plans were in place for the management of a number of patients with complex needs, which set out agreed parameters and ensured consistency in approach.

• The practice demonstrated a strong commitment to on-going development and innovative practice for the benefits of their practice population.

• The leadership in the practice drove continuous improvement and staff were accountable for delivering change. There was a clear proactive approach to seeking out and embedding new ways of providing care and treatment.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice