Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Hazim Ahmad practice on 29 November 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on November 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Hazim Ahmad on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive inspection carried out on 07 November 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 29 November 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall, the practice is now rated as Good.

The key questions were rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People - Good

People with long-term conditions - Good

Families, children and young people - Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students - Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable - Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) – Good

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice used systems to manage risk and safety incidents to reduce the likelihood of re-occurrence.
• When incidents happened, learning was shared with all staff and their procedures were improved at the practice.
• Incidents were regularly reviewed for effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided at the practice. We saw care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines.
• All staff members had received a ‘Disclosure and Barring Service’ (DBS) check.
• Policies were practice specific, had been updated, and reviewed. All staff knew where and how to access them.
• The emergency equipment and medicine monitoring process had been improved and was found to be effective.
• Evidence was seen that two-week wait referrals were well managed to ensure patients were not missed.
• Patients told us they were involved in their treatment and treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
• We found the appointment system was easy for patients to access care when needed.
• There was a strong focus on learning and improvement throughout the practice.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Improve the identification of patients who are carer’s to ensure they are provided with appropriate support.
• Develop greater access to practice information when the practice is closed, for example; accessibility to practice information on the internet for patients.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Hazim Ahmad practice on 29 November 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on November 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Hazim Ahmad on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive inspection carried out on 07 November 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 29 November 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall, the practice is now rated as Good.

The key questions were rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People - Good

People with long-term conditions - Good

Families, children and young people - Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students - Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable - Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) – Good

Our key findings were as follows:

• The practice used systems to manage risk and safety incidents to reduce the likelihood of re-occurrence.
• When incidents happened, learning was shared with all staff and their procedures were improved at the practice.
• Incidents were regularly reviewed for effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided at the practice. We saw care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines.
• All staff members had received a ‘Disclosure and Barring Service’ (DBS) check.
• Policies were practice specific, had been updated, and reviewed. All staff knew where and how to access them.
• The emergency equipment and medicine monitoring process had been improved and was found to be effective.
• Evidence was seen that two-week wait referrals were well managed to ensure patients were not missed.
• Patients told us they were involved in their treatment and treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
• We found the appointment system was easy for patients to access care when needed.
• There was a strong focus on learning and improvement throughout the practice.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Improve the identification of patients who are carer’s to ensure they are provided with appropriate support.
• Develop greater access to practice information when the practice is closed, for example; accessibility to practice information on the internet for patients.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We spoke with six people, all of whom gave positive responses about how their care and treatment was assessed and planned. One person told us, “The GP knows my situation. They assessed me and made appropriate referrals.” We saw that people’s needs were reviewed. One person we spoke with said, “They are good. They review me regularly. They look after me very well.” People said they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. One person said, “I am always asked my opinion and what I want to do.”

There was an induction pack available although some of the information was out of date. There was no documented evidence that induction had been undertaken by new staff to the surgery. However, we looked at three staff files and found staff received training to enable them to undertake their role effectively. One staff member said, “If you want to go on training or courses, it is not a problem.” We saw there was evidence of annual appraisals. One staff member told us, “I have an appraisal every year.”

There was a process in place for identifying and learning from significant events. We reviewed four significant events and found that learning had been identified and action had been taken to reduce the risk of similar incidents reoccurring. We saw that improvements had been made to ensure the risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who used the service and others were reduced and managed.