We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 13 August 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 not 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

Background

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.

Sloane Medical Practice is an independent health service based in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea that provides patient consultations, treatment and referrals for adults and children. Dr Sabrina Pao is the registered manager and one of the two GP business partners. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Our key findings were:

• Patients were safeguarded from abuse but there were gaps in safety arrangements such as infection control and staff fire safety training.
• Systems were in place to protect people from avoidable harm. When mistakes occurred, lessons were learned, and action was taken to minimise the potential for reoccurrence. Staff understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour.
• The service had arrangements in place to respond to medical emergencies.
• The service implemented clinical governance systems and had put processes in place to ensure the quality of GPs and non-clinical service provision.
• Staff we interviewed were aware of current evidence-based guidance. Staff were qualified and had the skills and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
• The service’s patient survey information and patient feedback we received indicated that patients were very satisfied with the service they received.
• Information about services and how to complain was available, lessons were learned, and improvements made in response to complaints and patient survey results.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management and worked well together as a team.
• There was a clear vision to provide a personalised, high quality service.

We identified regulations that were not being met and the provider must:

• Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

You can see full details of the regulations not being met at the end of this report.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

• Continue to review and improve Controlled Drugs prescribing.
• Review and improve systems for searching patient’s information.
• Review and improve systems to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care, such as checking for gaps or weaknesses in existing systems and processes.

We were unable to talk to any people who use the service on this inspection but we saw a small feedback sample where people were positive about their experience of the practice and their involvement in their care and treatment.

People got information about the service on the website, in the practice and provided at their appointments.

People had individual care and treatment plans and had their health needs and risks assessed and treated. Care and treatment was reviewed by the doctors. There were arrangements in place to keep people safe in the event of a medical emergency.

Children and vulnerable adults were kept safe through clear safeguarding policies and procedures and staff trained to know what to do if they had a concern.

Staff were kept up to date in core areas of practice, had annual appraisals and met together to review care and service issues.