Archived: Monkspath Surgery

Updated 20 August 2015

Monkspath Surgery is registered to provide primary medical services with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and is located in Solihull in the West Midlands in a purpose built premises. The practice has a registered list size of approximately 12,000 patients. It is located in an area with low levels of deprivation and among one of the least deprived areas nationally. It is part of NHS Solihull Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). CCGs are groups of general practices that work together to plan and design local health services in England. They do this by 'commissioning' or buying health and care services.

The practice consists of five GP partners (two male and three female) and four salaried GPs (all female) . There is also an advanced nurse practitioner (female), three practice nurses (all female), two health care assistants (both female) a practice manager and a team of reception and administrative staff.

As of the 1 April 2015 the practice holds a General Medical Services (GMS) contract to deliver essential primary care services.

The practice is open Monday to Friday 8am until 6.30pm. Appointments are available between 8.30am 6pm daily. Extended opening hours are available on Mondays and Thursday evenings between 6.30pm and 8pm. When the practice is closed during the out of hours period (6.30pm and 8am) patients are able to receive primary medical services through another provider (BADGER).

The practice was a GP training practice and a teaching practice for medical students as part of their undergraduate training.

The practice has not previously been inspected.

Updated 20 August 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Monkspath Surgery on 1 April 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring and responsive services and for being well-led. It was also good for providing services for the six population groups.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to legionella.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
• 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.
• Patients said they did not find it easy to obtain an appointment with their preferred GP and at their convenience. However, systems were in place to enable patients to consult with a GP the same day if needed.
• 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.

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

Importantly the provider should:

• Develop systems for maintaining specialist staff training records alongside core training so that the practice can be assured that training relevant to staff roles has been completed and any identified development needs are met.
• Ensure legionella risk assessments are up to date and actions identified have been implemented.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions. Clinical staff had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority. In-house services were available for the convenience of patients such as anti-coagulation clinics. Longer appointments and home visits were available if needed. Patients with long term conditions received structured annual reviews to check that their health and medication needs were being met. Those people with the most complex needs had care plans in place and their care was discussed regularly at practice meetings and with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of families, children and young people. There were systems in place to identify and follow up children who were at risk. Regular meetings were held with the health visitor to discuss the needs of vulnerable children. Immunisation rates were in line with other practices in the CCG area for all standard childhood immunisations. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. Young children were seen as a priority. Antenatal care was provided by the midwives on the premises.

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients were good for conditions commonly found in this population group. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of older people. Those over 75 years had a named GP to ensure continuity of care. The practice worked effectively with other health providers to meet the needs of patients at end of life. The practice had supported one care home to achieve gold standard framework accreditation in end of life care. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits. Practice facilities were accessible to those with mobility difficulties and a hearing loop was available for those with hearing impairment. The uptake of flu vaccinations in the older population was in line with other practices.

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students). The needs of the working age population, those recently retired and students had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care. There was a high demand for services and the practice provided a good skill mix of staff to meet patients’ needs, offered extended opening times and telephone consultations. The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group including NHS health checks and travel vaccinations.

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). Practice data showed 94% of people experiencing poor mental health had received an annual physical health check. The practice had a lead GP for mental health and drug and alcohol addictions. The GP was also a section 12 approved clinician. This is a clinician who can make decisions as to whether someone should be detained under the Mental Health Act (1983). The practice worked with other health professionals in the management of people experiencing poor mental health.

The practice supported patients experiencing poor mental health to access various support services such as counselling and advocacy services. Data from the practice showed that 90% of patients diagnosed with dementia had received a health review in the last 12 months to ensure their health needs were being met.

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The practice was located in one of the least deprived areas in the country. The practice had identified and had registers for patients living in vulnerable circumstances including those with a learning disability, drug and alcohol dependency and carers. It had carried out annual health checks for 63% of patients with a learning disability. Longer appointments were available if needed for patients who needed them.

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. It had provided information to vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse in vulnerable adults and children. Staff were aware of their responsibilities regarding information sharing, documentation of safeguarding concerns and how to contact relevant agencies in normal working hours and out of hours.