Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woodley Village Surgery on 6 June 2017.

The practice had undergone changes in its registration and the current GP single provider took over the leadership and management at the practice in September 2015. However the data referred to in this report for the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) refers to data collected and collated between April 2015 and March 2016. Data for the GP patient survey is from between July 2015 and March 2016. This was a period of significant change at the practice.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• The practice had a strong vision, which put working with patients to ensure high quality care and treatment as its top priority.
• The strategy to deliver this vision had been produced with stakeholders and was regularly reviewed and discussed with staff.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice had undergone a period of change which had resulted in improved services for patients. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The GP ensured all staff were supported to develop their skills and abilities and undertook a quarterly analysis of the different aspects of the service provided. Action was implemented to ensure improvements were undertaken. As a result, all business and clinical matters were delivered effectively at the practice.
• The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety. The culture of the practice had changed so that there was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
• The practice was committed to evidence based practice to improve the quality of care and treatment. Clinical auditing was based on up to date guidance and research to reflect innovation and the changing clinical needs of patients.
• Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients we spoke with said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care. The practice had reviewed its appointment system. The improvements undertaken had reduced the waiting time for a routine appointment from up to four weeks to between one and three days.
• The practice had an active patient participation group (PPG) who were supported and encouraged to participate in the development and improvement of the practice.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• The GP was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The area where the provider should make improvement included:

• Continued implementation of the planned programme to identify those patients who were also a carer.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice