We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 2nd November 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.

ESS Clinic provides specialist dermatology services to private fee-paying clients.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of the provision of advice or treatment by, or under the supervision of, a medical practitioner, including the prescribing of medicines. At ESS Clinic, the aesthetic cosmetic treatments that are also provided are exempt by law from CQC regulation. Therefore, we were only able to inspect the treatments provided for skin conditions such as the removal of skin tags, cysts and benign skin moles and minor surgery conducted at the service, but not the aesthetic cosmetic services.

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.

We did not speak with any clients during the inspection, but we did receive four comment cards on the day of inspection. The comment cards were sent to the service for clients to complete prior to our inspection.

Our key findings were:

• The service had clear systems to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
• Staff assessed clients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.
• There were systems in place to reduce risks to client safety. For example, infection control practices were carried out appropriately and there were regular checks on the environment and equipment used.
• A system was in place for reporting, investigating and learning from significant events and incidents.
• Clients were treated in line with best practice guidance and appropriate medical records were maintained.
• Systems were in place to protect personal information about clients.
• Systems were in place to deal with medical emergencies and staff were trained in basic life support.
• Clients were treated with dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.
• There were good systems in place to govern the service and support the provision of good quality care and treatment.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice