We carried out a comprehensive inspection of Stamford Hill Group Practice on 29 January 2015. We rated the practice as 'good' for the service being safe, effective, caring, responsive to people’s needs and well-led. We rated the practice as ‘Good’ for the care provided to older people and people with long term conditions and ‘Good’ for the care provided to, families, children and young people, working age people (including those recently retired and students), people living in vulnerable circumstances and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

We gave the practice an overall rating of ‘Good’

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice had robust systems in place to manage safety. Incidents were reported and investigated promptly and learning shared widely with all staff. Systems were in place for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children, infection control and medicine management. There were enough staff to keep people safe.
• Patient’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with current legislation.
• Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and there were appraisals and personal development plans for all staff.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. Patients said they could get an appointment in a reasonable time.
• Complaints were handled appropriately and learning shared widely with all staff.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported.

However, there was also one area of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

• Ensure non-clinical staff receive annual, written appraisals.

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We spoke with three GPs, including one of the practice's GP partners who was also the registered manager, a practice nurse, the practice manager, two members of the reception staff, as well as two health visitors who were working from the practice on the day of our visit. We also spoke with seven people who used the service.

People using the service told us their GP listened to their concerns and explained the treatment options available. Most people felt that their privacy, dignity and independence were respected. The practice ensured that people's cultural needs were being met, this included provision of interpreting service when needed.

People told us that the clinical staff took time to discuss and explain their care and treatment. All the patients we spoke with were happy with the service they received from the practice.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken some steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Staff received appropriate professional development. Patients told us they had confidence in the knowledge and skills of the staff at the practice.

People who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment through the Patient Participation Group and they were acted on. We also looked at NHS Choices website and saw that people's comments had been responded to by the practice.