Practice Plus Group - NHS 111 London

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We found that the service was providing responsive services because the provider organised and delivered services to meet patients' needs. It took account of patient needs and preferences. Patients were able to access care and treatment from the service within an appropriate timescale for their needs. The service took complaints and other patient feedback seriously and responded to them appropriately to improve the quality of care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service is a call service that provides both self-care advice and referral to other healthcare services. Although the patient survey did not specifically ask about changing needs, in general, patients were satisfied with the service.

Staff and leaders at the service told us that the service was committed to providing both care and redirection to other services that best met patients’ needs. They told us that they would involve patients in decisions about which services they wished to utilise.

Staff and leaders at the service told us that they understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs. They detailed processes by which care information was shared both with patients’ own GP, and services to which patients were referred.

The commissioners of the service told CQC that they were satisfied with the way that the provider worked with and referred to other health services in the area. They told us that the provider had engaged with the local population.

The provider understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs. The service had a system in place that alerted staff to any specific safety or clinical needs of a patient using the service, for example there were alerts about a patient being on the end-of-life pathway. Care pathways were appropriate for patients with specific needs, for example those at the end of their life, babies, children and young people. The service made reasonable adjustments when patients found it hard to access the service.

The service undertook patient surveys to review the quality of care provided. Although the service did not question patients directly about information with which they were provided the majority of patients were satisfied with the service. As the service is telephony-based, CQC did not speak to any patients on the days of the inspection.

Staff and leaders who we spoke to told us that they would provide patients with information about both their condition or their care pathway where relevant. Where patients' needs could not be met by the service, staff redirected them to the appropriate service for their needs.

The provider had processes in place to both ensure that staff had the training and guidance that they needed to provide good care, and to ensure that this was monitored with shared learning. The directory of services which staff referred to was regularly monitored and updated to ensure that it contained the most up-to-date pathways.

Information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns was available and the process was straightforward. Staff treated patients who made complaints compassionately. The complaint policy and procedures were in line with recognised guidance. We reviewed a sample of the complaints received by the service and found that all were satisfactorily handled in a timely way. We saw every step of the process of handling the complaint from receipt through to resolution. Learning, including dissemination to staff was attached to each complaint. Letters of apology detailing the findings of the investigations were clear and sufficiently detailed.

The service had a patient engagement and stakeholder lead. They told us that they had for the most part met with patient groups in the 6 Borough’s covered by the South West London contract. They told us that because the role was fairly new, most of the work in the initial phase was scoping. They had met with charities, Healthwatch organisations and organisations that represented specific patient groups. They told us that ultimately the organisation was working towards gathering wider patient feedback, and utilising it to develop the service moving forward.

The service had developed a framework based around the patient engagement and stakeholder lead to develop systems of feedback that were accessible to all patient groups, that would lead to service development moving forward.

The service undertook patient surveys to review the quality of care provided. Although the service did not question patients directly about equity in access, the majority of patients were satisfied with the service. As the service is telephony-based, CQC did not speak to any patients on the days of the inspection.

Leaders at the service told us that they were actively engaging with a broad range of patient groups to ensure that all patient groups had equity of access.

Patients could access the 111 service either by telephone or online. Interpretation services were available for patients who did not have English as a first language. The service also also utilised type/text talk for patients with hearing difficulties.

The service is telephony based, and as a consequence we were not able to ask patients about equity in experience and outcomes.

Leaders at the service told us that they were actively engaging with a broad range of patient groups to ensure that all patient groups had similar experiences and outcomes.

The service had developed a framework based around the patient engagement and stakeholder lead to develop systems to ensure equity in experience and outcome.

The service provided an immediate response to patient's urgent needs and was not involved in care planning. We did not find any concerns about the way in which the provider supported patients' plans.

The service provided an immediate response to patient's urgent needs and was not involved in care planning. We did not find any concerns about the way in which the provider supported patients' plans.

The service provided an immediate response to patient's urgent needs and was not involved in care planning. We did not find any concerns about the way in which the provider supported patients' plans.