We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 23 October 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Communitas Clinics (run by Communitas Clinics Ltd) delivers consultant-led community dermatology and ear, nose and throat assessment and treatment services for the NHS.

The Managing Director is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Two hundred and thirty three people provided feedback about the service. Two hundred and ten of the comments cards we received were wholly positive in their comments.

Our key findings were:

• There were a number of areas of risk that had been formally risk assessed and were being effectively mitigated. Risks associated with staff who were not fit and proper and from infection had been partially mitigated at the time of the inspection, and further action was taken shortly after the inspection.
• The service learned and made improvements when things went wrong.
• Audit was used to check care was delivered according to operating procedures.
• Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Staff were allowed regular time for personal development, meetings to review their progress and annual appraisals.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.
• Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

• Review the improved processes for managing risks to ensure that they are operating effectively.
• Consider developing documented protocols for checking that adults accompanying children too young to consent have parental responsibility.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We were told that the name of the service was currently Croydon PBC Ltd and not Brigstock Family Practice as recorded at the beginning of this report. However, it has not been possible to change the name of the service at this stage.

Croydon PBC and a laser clinic are located within the premises of Brigstock Family Practice although the services are independent of each other. Brigstock Family Practice is responsible for the premises and employs the reception staff.

During our inspection we spoke with four people using the dermatology clinic at Croydon PBC. They told us that staff who worked at the clinic treated them with respect and they felt happy with the service they received. We received some positive comments from people who used the service, these included ”Quality is great. Excellent care, really explained everything” and “I liked their holistic approach, they explained all the options to me”.

All the people we spoke with were referred by their GP; they told us they received their appointment at the clinic very quickly and often within days. Once at the clinic for their appointments, people usually waited between 15 and 30 minutes before being seen. However, this was not an issue for people who told us ‘the consultation was worth the wait’.

We spoke with four people who used the service and overall they expressed satisfaction with the care and treatment provided. They felt involved and were provided with sufficient information to make decisions about their treatment. People told us, “No complaints. I was treated well by everybody,” and "“I found them to be fine. I had no problems with them."

We found that staff were supported to provide appropriate care with training and regular supervision. The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of service provided.

We were informed that the name of the service was Croydon PBC Ltd and not Brigstock Family Practice as recorded at the beginning of this report. Once the inspection process had commenced it was not possible to alter the heading of the report.