At our previous inspection on 18 April 2013, we saw that the provider did not have effective systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who used the service. Systems were not in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

At this inspection we saw that systems had been put in place to manage and monitor the delivery of care and treatment at the service. There was a system in place to identify, report and respond to risks. A structured induction and training programme had been introduced for staff that ensured people received safe care and treatment.

At our last inspection, we found that the provider could not demonstrate that there were effective systems in place to manage risks to the quality and safety of care. Improvements were also needed to ensure equipment being used was safe and people’s confidential information was protected.

At this inspection, we found that a number of changes had taken place to protect people from the risk of harm. Safety checks had been completed and brought up to date to ensure that equipment being used was properly maintained and suitable for its purpose. Arrangements were also being made to dispose of equipment and other products no longer required or suitable for use in the clinic. People’s records had also been stored securely to protect the confidentiality of this information.

The local checks and reviews described by staff to ensure people were protected from unsafe care and treatment were still not always evidenced or completed in a timely way. There was no process to identify risks and early indicators of where action may be needed to maintain the quality and safety of care. There was no evidence of a structured induction and training programme to ensure staff had the appropriate and up to date skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.

This was the first inspection of the clinic since registration in October 2010. During our inspection, we talked with three people who had received or were receiving treatment at the clinic and two members of staff.

People were very positive about their treatment. All the people we spoke with told us they were fully informed and involved in making decisions about their treatment. One person told us, "The whole experience has been wonderful, the staff are so open and honest, they really empowered us to make decisions based on the results of our tests.” Another person told us, “They explained all the options and went through the consent forms and everything when we first visited.”

Overall, we found that the management arrangements at the clinic needed to improve. Whilst there were some systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of care, these checks were not always adequately evidenced. Wider information governance practice in the clinic needed to be improved to ensure that people’s confidential information was respected and information was not held unnecessarily. We were not always able to evidence that key management processes were in place at the clinic. There were a number of records that we requested to see that the provider was unable to provide at the time of our inspection.This included maintenance records for the clinic, which meant we were unable to check that equipment being used had been adequately maintained.