Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Parvinder Garcha, also known as Hounslow Family Practice, on 22 June 2016. The practice was rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective, and well-led services, and good for providing caring and responsive services. Overall the practice was rated as requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Parvinder Garcha on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive follow up inspection on 11 September to check for improvements since our previous inspection. The practice is now rated as good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
• The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
• Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
• There was evidence of kind and compassionate care, with the GP principal providing his direct contact number to palliative care patients and their families. The GP also visited these patients in hospital and liaised with hospital staff to ensure continuity of care was maintained.
• Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their 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, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by the GPs and management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Implement safety signage to indicate oxygen is stored on the premises.
• Review the system to monitor and assess performance for the childhood immunisation programme.
• Advertise that a translation service is available to patients on request.
• Raise staff awareness of the practice’s updated complaints procedure.

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 Parvinder Garcha, also known as Hounslow Family Practice, on 22 June 2016. The practice was rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective, and well-led services, and good for providing caring and responsive services. Overall the practice was rated as requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Parvinder Garcha on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive follow up inspection on 11 September to check for improvements since our previous inspection. The practice is now rated as good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
• The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
• Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
• There was evidence of kind and compassionate care, with the GP principal providing his direct contact number to palliative care patients and their families. The GP also visited these patients in hospital and liaised with hospital staff to ensure continuity of care was maintained.
• Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their 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, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by the GPs and management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Implement safety signage to indicate oxygen is stored on the premises.
• Review the system to monitor and assess performance for the childhood immunisation programme.
• Advertise that a translation service is available to patients on request.
• Raise staff awareness of the practice’s updated complaints procedure.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

During our visit to the practice we spoke with three people who use the service. They told us that they felt treated with respect by their GP, that they listened to them and they felt involved in their care and treatment. One person told us that “all the staff are lovely, and very friendly”. All the people we spoke with said that they felt they were given enough time during their appointment to be able to discuss their needs with the GP or practice nurse. They felt informed about different treatment options available to them and involved in decisions about their care.

We looked at the feedback forms that the practice asked people to complete, as well as the log of complaints received. We also saw the feedback people had put onto the NHS Choices website. This information helped us to gain an overview of people’s experiences of the service.

We spoke with the lead GP, a practice nurse, the practice manager, healthcare assistant and reception staff. They all said they enjoyed working at the practice, that there was good teamwork and they felt supported by the provider and the other staff.

There were systems in place to minimise the spread of infection and ensure that equipment was safe and appropriate for use.

Some systems were in place to monitor the quality of service provided, however, people's views and opinions had not always been taken into consideration in relation to how the service was run.