The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Whitecliff Surgery

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

White Cliff Mill Street, Blandford Forum, Dorset, DT11 7BH (01258) 452501

Provided and run by:
The Blandford Group Practice

All Inspections

26 October 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Whitecliff Surgery on 26 October 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Requires Improvement.

Safe - Requires Improvement,

Effective - Good,

Responsive – Inspected, but not rated

Well-led – Requires Improvement.

Following our previous inspection on 20 July 2016, the practice was rated Good overall and for all key questions.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Whitecliff Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities. This included:

  • Safe, effective and well-led domains,
  • Patient access to the service.

We did not inspect caring and responsive at this inspection and the ratings from the previous inspection carry through.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.

Our findings

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 found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm, however not all aspects of safe care were fully embedded at the time of the inspection.
  • There were gaps in safeguarding training with clinicians not being trained to the appropriate levels that were essential to their roles.
  • There were shortfalls in the completion of records of staff vaccination for all clinical staff.
  • Actions from health and safety and Infection Prevention Control (IPC) audits had not been completed.
  • There were gaps in the process to ensure safe and appropriate authorisation for Patient Group Directions (PGD) and/or Patient Specific Directions (PSD).
  • The practice was not able to demonstrate the prescribing competence of non-medical prescribers
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed did not always promote the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • The oversight of some systems and processes was not always comprehensive.

We found a breach of Regulation 17 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Good governance. The provider must:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

The provider also should:

  • Improve cervical cancer screening uptake to meet the national targets.
  • Ensure statutory notifications are submitted to CQC in timely manner as per guidance.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

20 July 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Whitecliff Group Practice on 20 July 2016. 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 an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients 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 management. The practice 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.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

The practice was involved in a joint initiative with other healthcare providers to employ a community worker. This member of staff organised support activities and established links with existing voluntary, social and self-help groups. For example, carers pamper days, group days out, bereavement counselling and patient transport. Their intervention had made a positive impact on approximately 120 older patients and their carers in the last 12 months.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice