Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Drs SL Nicholls, S M Nicholl, HL Hughes, & Ninan - St John's House on 18 August 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.

• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. Improvements had been made to the premises which included increasing the number of clinical rooms, new flooring, improved facilities for staff and providing a range of seating in the waiting area for patients with limited mobility.
• The practice sought to increase the services available to patients by signing up to enhanced services. For example, the care co-ordinator pilot, 24 hour blood pressure monitoring, minor surgery and electrocardiograms (ECGs).
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review the support and training provided for the infection control lead to help them to carry out their role effectively.
• Review the arrangements for the laundering of curtains in clinical areas in accordance with the current guidelines.
• The practice should review the clinical staff who are invited to attend the weekly informal clinical meetings held at the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

As part of our inspection we spoke with four patients who used the service, four staff members, a doctor, who was also the registered manager, a nurse practitioner, the acting practice manager and three reception staff.

The practice had a ‘Patient Participation Group’ (PPG) who met regularly to discuss the services provided by the practice. They told us they expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about the practice. They said the doctors listened to them and the reception staff were “Really helpful.” They said patients were able to visit the surgery and were always guaranteed to see a doctor.

Other patients told us they felt confident about returning to the surgery to see their doctor should they find their medication was not working. They also said they had been offered options in planning their treatment. There were examples of how the practice offered choice, treatment and support to meet people’s needs.

All staff had received abuse awareness training and procedures were in place to respond appropriately to any allegation of abuse.

Appropriate recruitment checks were not in place prior to the employment of staff. We have judged that this has a minor impact on people who use the service, and have told the provider to take action.

People had their comments and complaints listened to and, where appropriate, action had been taken.

We reviewed the information available to us about Cleckheaton Group Practice on 8 May 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.