We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Richard Clare on 4 December 2018 as part of our inspection programme. The practice was previously inspected on 22 January 2015 and was rated good overall.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

• what we found when we inspected
• information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
• information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We have rated the safe domain as requires improvement because:

• Test results were not always managed in a timely manner
• Individual care records, including clinical data, were not written in line with current guidance and relevant legislation.
• The approach to managing unplanned clinical staff absence was ineffective.
• The approach to managing significant incidents, low-level incidents, formal complaints and verbal complaints was not consistent.

However, we also found that:

• Patient care was provided in a way that supported and include them.
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
• The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
• The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

The provider must:

• Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

The practice of Dr Richard Clare was inspected on the 22 January 2015. This was a comprehensive inspection. This means we reviewed the provider in relation to the five key questions leading to a rating on each on a four point rating scale. We rated the practice as good in relation to being safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

Our key findings were as follows:

The practice had a system in place for reporting, recording and monitoring significant events. Significant incidents and events were used as an opportunity for learning and improving the safety of patients, staff and other visitors to the practice.

Feedback from patients we spoke with, or who provided written comments, was complimentary and positive about the quality of the care and treatment provided by the staff team at the practice. There was no evidence of discrimination of any sort in relation to the provision of care or treatment.

Patients informed us that their privacy and dignity was always respected particularly during physical or intimate examinations. All patient appointments were conducted in the privacy of individual consultation room.

The practice team had planned and implemented a service that was responsive to the needs of the local patient population. The practice actively engaged with commissioners of services, local authorities, other providers, patients and those close to them to support the provision of coordinated and integrated pathways of care that meet patient’s needs.

The practice had gathered feedback from patients through the yearly practice patient survey and comments and complaints received. We looked at the results of the January 2015 GP patient survey and the survey conducted by the practice in December 2014. Both of these reflected high levels of satisfaction with the care, treatment and services provided. However where issues were identified action had been taken to address them.

We saw areas of outstanding practice including:

The practice provided a GP service for three residential accommodation facilities for patients with severe and enduring mental illness. To maximise the support provided the practice team had developed effective working relationships with the mental health workers in Sale and where appropriate carried out joint visits to see patients.

The practice worked closely with Trafford learning disabilities team. For example they had recently worked with them to organise day care respite and physiotherapy within the learning disability team where mainstream services were unable to accommodate the patient.

The lead GP and senior members of the practice team described to us a clear value system which provided the foundations for ensuring the delivery of a high quality service to patients. They took pride in the practice being very much a traditional family practice, describing how knowledge of patients and their families had been built up over many years which resulted in a strong trusting relationship which greatly enriched the patient experience.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice