Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Sidcup Medical Centre on 30 November 2016. The practice was rated good overall and requires improvement for providing services that were caring. The full comprehensive report from the November 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Sidcup Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced desk-based review carried out on 14 September 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the recommendations we made in our previous inspection on 14 September 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those recommendations made at our last inspection.

At our previous inspection undertaken on 30 November 2016, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing caring services as:

• The practice had only identified 61 patients (less than 1%) as having caring responsibilities.

The practice is now rated as good for the key question: Are services caring?

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice had taken action in response to our recommendation. The practice had increased the numbers of patients on their carers register to 125 patients which equated to 1.37% of their 9134 patient list.

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 Sidcup Medical Centre on 30 November 2016. The practice was rated good overall and requires improvement for providing services that were caring. The full comprehensive report from the November 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Sidcup Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced desk-based review carried out on 14 September 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the recommendations we made in our previous inspection on 14 September 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those recommendations made at our last inspection.

At our previous inspection undertaken on 30 November 2016, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing caring services as:

• The practice had only identified 61 patients (less than 1%) as having caring responsibilities.

The practice is now rated as good for the key question: Are services caring?

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice had taken action in response to our recommendation. The practice had increased the numbers of patients on their carers register to 125 patients which equated to 1.37% of their 9134 patient list.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

On this occasion, we did not speak with people using the service as part of our inspection.

We found that the provider had made significant improvements and that staff files had been updated. There were policies and procedures in place to ensure that only suitable staff were recruited.

During this inspection we spent time at both GP surgeries in Church Avenue and Burnt Oak Lane, Sidcup. People we spoke with were generally happy with the treatment they received from the surgery. One person told us "I cannot talk highly enough about this practice" and another described the care they received as "excellent". We found that most people felt listened to by the GPs and felt the reception staff were very kind and helpful at the practice. People said they did not have difficulty getting through on the telephone or getting an appointment, and they were sometimes kept informed if the GP was running late with appointments.

Most people felt their personal information was kept private and they were treated with respect by all staff. One person said "the GP always listens to me and I am very happy with the care I receive". Another person told us that they had been coming to the practice for a very long time and usually saw the nurse and that they were reasonably happy with the service they received.

We found that people were involved in their care and people's needs were assessed. Care was planned and the treatment they received was documented in their medical records. There were child protection procedures in place and staff had been trained in both child and adult safeguarding procedures and there were policies and flow charts for safeguarding available for staff to refer to. The practice had systems in place to ensure the quality of the service was monitored. However, the practice did not have a robust system in place regarding recruitment and therefore had not taken steps to ensure only suitable people were employed at the service.