This service is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Outstanding

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Chorley Integrated Urgent Care Centre on 14 November 2017. This was our first inspection of this new service.

At this inspection we found:

• The service had comprehensive systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When they did happen, the service learned from them and improved their processes.
• The service routinely and frequently reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
• Staff involved and treated people with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. Patients told us that they appreciated the service and praised the staff who cared for them.
• Patients were generally able to access care and treatment from the service within an appropriate timescale for their needs. Where this was problematic, the service was working to an action plan to produce improvements.
• The patient engagement manager worked proactively with patients who contacted the service frequently to address their needs and reduce the number of times that they needed to contact the service.
• The service focused on the needs of patients. Managers told us that patients’ needs were central to the organisation.
• There was a proactive approach to managing the skill mix of staff needed to provide best care to patients. Staff felt respected, valued and supported.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation. The organisation was forward thinking and had initiated schemes to improve outcomes for patients in the area. It was working with the hospital emergency department to agree pathways of care for different patient conditions.

We saw two areas of outstanding practice:

• Patients’ individual needs and preferences were central to the planning and delivery of the service. For example, the service had worked with deaf expert patients to help understand the needs of those patients following a patient complaint. They designed their own patient leaflets to explain the services that they offered and to give patients health information.
• The service leadership offered all staff a chance every year to bid for innovations that would benefit the organisation or the local community. We saw evidence of where this fund had been invested over the three years previously and staff told us how much they appreciated being consulted regarding the service and community development.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice