The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Park Private Clinic

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

16 Regent Street, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG1 5BQ (0115) 896 7878

Provided and run by:
F&A Health Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Park Private Clinic 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 Park Private Clinic, you can give feedback on this service.

27 June 2019

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall. The service was previously inspected in March 2018.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Park Private Clinic as part of our inspection programme.

Park Private Clinic was last inspected in March 2018, but it was not rated as this was not a requirement for independent health providers at that time. Since April 2019, all independent health providers are now rated, and this inspection was undertaken to provide a rating for this service.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Park Private Clinic provides a range of non-surgical cosmetic interventions which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

The clinician is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered people. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

49 patients provided feedback about the service using CQC comment cards. Patients were very positive regarding the quality of the service provided.

Our key findings were:

  • The service 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.
  • Patients commented that staff were kind and caring, treated them with respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Services were tailored to meet the needs of individual patients and were accessible.
  • The culture of the practice and the way it was led and managed drove the delivery and improvement of high-quality, person-centred care.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

23 March 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 23 March 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the practice was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Park Private Clinic offers patients a range of private GP medical services including; travel vaccinations (in addition to being a registered NathNaC yellow fever centre), private GP consultations, sexual health tests, employment medicals as well as corporate and individual health screenings from a purposefully converted building in Nottingham City Centre. These are available on both a walk-in and pre-bookable appointment basis.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC, which relate to particular types of service and these are set out in Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

At Park Private Clinic, the aesthetic cosmetic treatments that are also provided are exempt by law from CQC regulation. The provider, which is F&A Health Ltd, is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide services at 16 Regent Street, The Park, Nottingham, NG1 5BQ. The period property has been used to provide services to patients since 2013.

The GP is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We received 53 comment cards in the lead up to the inspection, the patients responses were entirely positive about their experiences at the practice. Feedback on their care and treatment described the care received as being extremely caring and professional, very respectful and the GP as very informative. A large proportion of patients commented on the relaxed atmosphere and never feeling rushed during appointments.

Our key findings were:

  • The service took a proactive approach to updating systems and facilities as a result of incidents to reduce the likelihood they would happen again.
  • The way in which care was delivered was reviewed to ensure it was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • We saw patients were treated with compassion and kindness and patient feedback supported this.
  • Services were provided to meet the needs of patients.
  • Patient feedback for the services offered was consistently positive.
  • Staff told us there was an open and inclusive culture of management and felt their views were listened to.
  • There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

Review the registration process to ensure that adults accompanying children for appointments had parental authority for the child before treatment was provided.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We spoke with six people who used the service as part of our inspection. They all expressed that they had been satisfied with the care and treatment they had received at the clinic. One person said: "I used the service and it was great. I have nothing to complain about." Another person commented: "I found the whole experience very caring. The doctor rang about three times after I saw him." Nobody had any concerns about the quality of care being delivered at the service.

We spoke with two members of staff working at the clinic and we spoke with the provider. Staff were happy working for the service and described to us how patients were able to feedback to them on an on-going basis. The told us that they were supported and that they felt adequately trained to carry out their roles.

We found that consent was being obtained from people for all treatments offered at the service. We found that people's care was being risk assessed and planned and delivered to meet their individual needs. However, we found there was not adequate emergency equipment on site to ensure people's safety.

The service was clean and hygienic and there were systems in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of infection.

There were systems in place to allow people using the service to express their views about how the service was being run. Management checks were in place to ensure the safe delivery of appropriate care to people.