We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 3 May 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.

Nuffield Health Fitness & Wellbeing is part of Nuffield Health a not-for-profit healthcare provider. The clinic located in Paddington provides a variety of health assessments for both corporate and private clients offered on a fee paying basis to adults only.

The service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. For example, physiotherapy and lifestyle coaching do not fall within the regulated activities for which the location is registered with CQC.

The general manager 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 obtained 19 completed Care Quality Commission comment cards. Feedback was very positive about the service provided and the professionalism and friendliness of the staff. We did not speak with any patients during the inspection.

Our key findings were:

• There was an open and transparent approach to safety with effective systems in place for reporting and recording incidents.
• There were systems in place to check all equipment had been serviced regularly, including blood screening equipment.
• There were clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety and risks to patients were well managed. For example, there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.
• Systems were in place to deal with medical emergencies and staff were trained in basic life support.
• Clinicians regularly assessed patients according to appropriate guidance and standards such as those issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
• Staff maintained the necessary skills and competence to support the needs of patients.
• Staff were up to date with current guidelines and were led by a proactive management team.
• Patients were provided with information about their health and with advice and guidance to support them to live healthier lives.
• Staff were kind, caring, competent and put patients at their ease.

• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand and improvements were made to the quality of care and treatment as a result of complaints and concerns.

• The service had good facilities and equipment to treat patients and meet their needs. All health assessment rooms were well organised and equipped.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The service proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of, and complied with, the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

During our visit there was no one using the service available for interview. However, we saw from feedback questionnaires that overall people were satisfied with the health assessments provided at the centre.

People were provided with sufficient information on which to make an informed decision about treatments, including fees. Following a health assessment each person received a report setting out recommendations for improving their health.

All areas of the centre were clean, tidy and well maintained. We saw evidence of regular cleaning audits.

People were given the opportunity to provide feedback and this was used to make improvements in the service

No people who use the service were available for interview during our visit. We looked at questionnaires returned by them and these were mainly very positive about the service received. People had the screening and diagnostic procedures clearly explained to them, including who would be undertaking them and the outcomes and choice of treatment available including any areas of risk.