The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners Also known as Alma Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Surgery, 68 Alma Road, Portswood, Southampton, Hampshire, SO14 6UX (023) 8067 2666

Provided and run by:
Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners 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 Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners, you can give feedback on this service.

17 December 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners on 17 December 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

12 Dceember 2018 to 12 December2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Ord-Hume and Partners on 12 December 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

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 have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. 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.

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

  • Continue to make improvements in QOF results in the areas of Diabetes care, hypertension and cervical screening.
  • Continue to improve patient access to booking appointments and improve results of the National Patients GP survey.

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

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

11 August 2016

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced focussed inspection at Dr G C Ord-Hume & Partners on 11 August 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

At our previous inspection on 22 December 2015 we found that the practice was rated overall as inadequate and was placed into special measures.

Our key findings were that improvements were required to:

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include all necessary employment checks for all staff.
  • Ensure that a robust system is in place for the review and action of pathology results.
  • Carry out full clinical audits and re-audits to improve patient outcomes.
  • Ensure new and existing staff receive the training, learning and development necessary for them to fulfil the requirements of their role, including training in adult safeguarding.
  • Ensure an infection control audit is undertaken, and that any subsequent areas identified for improvement are actioned.
  • Ensure work to minimise risk from legionella infection is carried out.
  • Address the patient survey results to improve the patient experience and apply understanding to the future direction of the practice.

We inspected the practice on 11 August 2016 to check that they had followed the action plan they had submitted and to confirm that they now met legal requirements.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected on 11 August 2016 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 managed. A member of staff had started to make assessment of the practice for health and safety but the records were not fully completed with evidence of any actions taken.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • A more robust system and checklist has been put in place to ensure that appropriate recruitment checks were carried out for all staff. This was overseen by the practice manager. A risk assessment had completed been for current staff without references who had previously worked for the surgery and taken a career break. All staff records now contained photographic identification. From January 2016 a checklist was put in place in all new staff files ensuring that all necessary checks are carried out.
  • A thorough assessment of the practice’s infection control had been carried out with input from the clinical commissioning group.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

A full health and safety risk assessment of the practice is required along with any action that is needed to take place to ensure that the premise is safe for patients and staff members. This had been commenced and should be completed.

I am taking this service out of special measures. This recognises the significant improvements made to the quality of care provided by this service.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

22 December 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr G C Ord-Hume and Partners on 22 December 2015. Overall the practice is rated as Inadequate. Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Pathology results were not appropriately handled in the practice.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and generally well-managed, with the exception of those relating to recruitment checks.
  • Data showed that some patient outcomes were low for the locality. Although some audits had been carried out, the practice did not evidence that audits were driving improvement in performance to improve patient outcomes.
  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.
  • Staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, but did not always act upon this.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Urgent appointments were usually available on the day they were requested.
  • The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, but some were overdue a review.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include all necessary employment checks for all staff.

  • Ensure that a robust system is in place for the review and action of pathology results.

  • Carry out full clinical audits and re-audits to improve patient outcomes.

  • Ensure new and existing staff receive the training, learning and development necessary for them to fulfil the requirements of their role, including training in adult safeguarding.

  • Ensure an infection control audit is undertaken, and that any subsequent areas identified for improvement are actioned.

  • Ensure work to minimise risk from legionella infection is carried out.

  • Address the patient survey results to improve the patient experience and apply understanding to the future direction of the practice.

In addition the provider should:

  • Review and update procedures and guidance.

I am placing this practice in special measures. Practices placed in special measures will be inspected again within six months. If insufficient improvements have been made so a rating of inadequate remains for any population group, key question or overall, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures to begin the process of preventing the provider from operating the service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration within six months if they do not improve.

The practice will be kept under review and if needed could be escalated to urgent enforcement action. Where necessary, another inspection will be conducted within a further six months, and if there is not enough improvement we will move to close the service.

Special measures will give patients who use the practice the reassurance that the care they get should improve.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

29 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with ten patients who were visiting the surgery the day of our inspection. We also spoke with the registered manager, who was the senior GP partner, the practice manager, practice nurse and three administrative staff. Two patients told us they'd 'never had any problems getting an appointment; I can be seen the same day if it's an emergency'. Whilst five others stated they had problems getting through on the telephone especially in the morning. Overall patients were happy with the service they received from the surgery and the staff.

The provider had suitable arrangements in place that respected the dignity and privacy of patients'. The provider took proper steps to ensure patients were protected against the risks of receiving care or treatment that was inappropriate or unsafe.

There were suitable arrangements in place for all staff to be able to recognise and report safeguarding concerns to the relevant person and authority. Patients' were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

Patients were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. The provider followed an effective recruitment process which included appropriate checks.

The provider had a system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of patient using the service and others