Head Office

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 assessed a total of 7 quality statements from this key question. Our rating for this key question is good. We found people could access care that was centred around their needs. The provider understood the needs of the population and tailored the service to meet these needs. Complaints were investigated fully and patients were told the outcome of their complaints.

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.

Patients were able to access care that was centred around them and appropriate for their needs. Staff took into account people’s individual needs when delivering care and treatment.

Leaders at the service understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to both the needs of the patients, and the needs of the GP practices in the Bexley area. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the needs of populations served by the service.

Staff that we spoke to were aware of the need to share decisions with the patient. Leaders at the service told us that there were detailed procedures in place where the practice worked with other providers.

We found no concerns regarding care provision, integrity and continuity.

The provider understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs. The service had a system of alerts in place that alerted staff to any specific safety or clinical needs of a person using the service. This included the mental capacity of the patient.

Information was available in a variety of formats to accommodate the needs of patients.

Staff provided patients with information about their condition or their care pathway where relevant. Where patient's needs could not be met by the service, staff redirected them to the appropriate service for their needs.

The services 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. This record review undertaken as part of this assessment showed that patients were provided with necessary information relevant to their care.

We found people were listened to and involved in decisions about their care. People were able to give feedback and make complaints about the service. Feedback was used to make improvements to the service.

Staff at the service were aware of the complaints process, the need to provide details of the system to complainants, and the escalation procedure. Leaders at the service told us that issues were investigated across relevant providers, and staff were able to feedback to other parts of the patient pathway where relevant. They told us that the service learned lessons from individual concerns and complaints and from analysis of trends. The service acted as a result to improve the quality of care.

Information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns was available and it was easy to do. 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.

Feedback collected by the provider showed that patients were generally satisfied with access to appointments at this service. Comments referred to short waiting times, and easy to access appointments when required.

The service was booked through a patient’s home GP practice, and as such the service was accessible to all patients who might request an appointment.

The service provided extended access GP appointments for patients registered with GP practices in Bexley. Appointments were available at 12 GP practices within Bexley from 6.30pm to 8pm Monday to Friday and from 9am to 5pm on Saturdays. Services were delivered at some sites on the same days and times each week. For other sites, sessions were alternated to allow as many patients as possible to attend a location convenient for them.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. The provider collected feedback from patients to monitor experience and outcomes and to make improvements to the service.

The service was booked through a patient’s home GP practice, and as such the service is accessible to all patients who might request an appointment.

The provider developed and monitored processes to ensure equity of experiences and outcomes. The provider used tools such as audits and patient feedback to improve services.

The services involved patients in future plans and provided information so that patients could make informed decisions.

We did not have any concerns from feedback from leaders and staff about planning for the future.

The service had recently been commissioned to undertake a chronic kidney disease (CKD) multiple co-morbidity project across Bexley. The provider told us that the long term aim of this project was to delay deterioration of renal failure, optimise care, improve mental wellbeing and provide holistic support for improved patient outcomes. The plan of the project was to provide improvements in care which will support with system pressures, although they had not had time to measure this at the time of the assessment. The service had also been in involved in other pilots in the Bexley area, including a project to improve cancer screening and outcomes in the North of the borough.