The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Snodland Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Snodland Medical Centre, Catts Alley, Snodland, Kent, ME6 5SN (01634) 240296

Provided and run by:
Snodland Medical Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Snodland Medical Practice on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Snodland Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

29 September 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Snodland Medical Practice on 29 September 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

The key questions are rated as:

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring - Good

Responsive - Good

Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection on 6 December 2016 the practice was rated good overall but requires improvement for providing safe services. We carried out an announced focused inspection on 23 May 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the breaches in regulations identified at the inspection on 6 December 2016. We found that the practice had made significant improvements and was rated as good for providing safe services.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provider a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach.

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.
  • The practice learned and made improvements when things went wrong.
  • The practice had identified patients who may need extra support and worked to improve access to services for these patients.
  • The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • There was compassionate, inclusive and effective leadership at all levels.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Ensure that an action plan, including completion dates, is included as part of all risk assessments.
  • Continue to implement and monitor the outcome of plans to improve performance relating to antibiotic prescribing.
  • Improve monitoring of refrigerator temperatures, ensuring accurate recording of actions taken where temperatures are outside of acceptable limits.
  • Continue to improve cervical cancer screening uptake.

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

23 May 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Colin-Jones & Partners on 6 December 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the December 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Colin-Jones & Partners on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 23 May 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 6 December 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice was able to demonstrate they were following national guidance on infection prevention and control.

  • The practice was keeping inventories of vaccines held and was recording the batch numbers of local anaesthetic agents used during minor surgical procedures.

  • Records showed that practice had carried out a full fire risk assessment on 7 December 2017.

  • A legionella risk assessment had been carried out on 14 December 2016 and the practice had developed and implemented an action plan to address issue identified.

  • Records showed that practice staff were checking the automated external defibrillator and medical oxygen on a regular basis.

  • The practice had identified an additional 30 patients on the practice list who were also carers. The total number of identified patients on the practice list who were also carers was now 136. This represented 1.1% of the practice list.

However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

  • Continue to identify patients who are also carers to help ensure eligible patients are offered relevant support.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 December 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Colin-Jones & Partners on 6 December 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 a system for reporting and recording significant events.

  • There were systems, processes and practice to help keep patients safe. However, the practice was unable to demonstrate they were always following national guidance on infection prevention and control.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.
  • There was evidence of clinical audits driving quality improvement.
  • 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.
  • The practice had a website and patients were able to book appointments, order repeat prescriptions and view their records online.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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. However, the practice was unable to demonstrate they had an effective system to help ensure all governance documents were kept up to date.
  • The practice gathered feedback from patients through the patient participation group (PPG), complaints received, patient surveys and by carrying out analysis of the results from the GP patient survey and the Friends and Family Test.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are;

  • Revise infection prevention and control management to ensure national guidance is followed.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are;

  • Revise medicines management to consider keeping inventories of vaccines held and recording the batch numbers of local anaesthetic agents used during minor surgical procedures.

  • Revise fire safety management and consider carrying out full fire risk assessments on a regular basis.

  • Revise legionella control management following the comprehensive risk assessment in December 2016 to consider all risks identified.

  • Revise emergency equipment and emergency medicines management to include the recording of checks made of the automated external defibrillator and medical oxygen.

  • Continue to identify patients who are also carers to help ensure they are offered appropriate support.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice