• Doctor
  • GP practice

Castlecroft Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Castlecroft Avenue, Castlecroft, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV3 8JN (01902) 761629

Provided and run by:
Castlecroft 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 Castlecroft 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 Castlecroft Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

12 August 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced inspection at Castlecroft Medical Practice over a period of five days, the final inspection date was the 12 August 2021 when we carried out an onsite inspection visit. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Ratings for each key question:

Safe – Good

Effective – Good

Well Led – Good

Castlecroft Medical Practice was previously inspected in September 2019 and rated requires improvement overall and for all population groups.

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

Why we carried out this review

This inspection was an announced inspection to follow up on:

  • the requirement notices issued at the last inspection in September 2019.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our reviews differently. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing / telephone
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing the findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • Carrying out a 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
  • 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:

  • Effective systems had been implemented to ensure medicines and equipment were secure and safe to be used.
  • Arrangements had been put in place to support the management and monitoring of patients prescribed high risk medicines.
  • The practice had ensured all clinical staff had access to safety alerts related to patients care and treatment and these were monitored to ensure appropriate action was taken.
  • The arrangements for the management of incidents and complaints was reviewed and systems introduced to demonstrate learning and improvements at the practice.
  • Staff were clear and knowledgeable about their lead roles and responsibilities.
  • Effective governance arrangements had been implemented to mitigate risks and ensure patients were kept safe.

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

  • Continue to improve the monitoring and review of patients prescribed high risk medicines.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

02 Sep 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Castlecroft Medical Practice Centre on 2 September 2019 as part of our inspection programme. This inspection looked at the following key questions; safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

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 requires improvement overall.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:

  • There was not an effective system to ensure that medicines and equipment were secure and safe to be used.
  • The practice was not receiving all necessary patient safety alerts.
  • There was not always comprehensive learning from incidents and complaints documented in a timely manner.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing well-led services because:

  • Practice management were not always aware of issues and risks within the practice.
  • It was not always clear which staff members were responsible for what roles.
  • Governance arrangements were not always effective at ensuring patients were kept safe.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective, caring and responsive services because:

  • Staff treated 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 area where the provider must make improvements is:

  • Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Improve the identification of carers to enable this group of patients to access the care and support they need.
  • Continue to monitor and improve performance in relation to patients with long term conditions and patients experiencing poor mental health.
  • Review governance systems are ensure they are embedded within the practice.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

12 December 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out a comprehensive inspection at Castlecroft Medical Practice on 12 December 2014. The practice is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide primary care services to its local population. This is the report of the findings from our inspection.

We have rated each section of our findings for each key area. The practice provided an effective, caring, responsive and well led service for the six population groups it served but required improvement to provide a safe service. The overall rating was good and this was because the practice staff consistently strived to provide a good standard of care for patients.

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.
  • Infection prevention and control systems were well managed and staff had received appropriate training. Lead roles had been assigned to manage infection control and staff were aware of who held the lead role.
  • The practice was proactive in measuring and monitoring risks to patients and services provided. Risks identified were discussed at practice meetings and evidence was available to demonstrate that necessary action had been taken where risks were identified.
  • Systems were in place to review the care needs of those patients with complex health needs or those in vulnerable circumstances. Patient care co-ordinators at the practice made regular contact with these patients to help ensure that they attended routine health checks and immunisations.
  • Patients said that the GPs listened to what they had to say and treated them with compassion, dignity and respect. Patients told us that they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients reported good access to the service; those patients who required an urgent appointment were given an appointment on the same day that they telephoned. Those patients who were hard of hearing were able to email requests for urgent appointments. Patients were able to book and cancel appointments on-line, by telephone or by visiting the practice.
  • 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.
  • The practice manager, business manager and GP partners were responsible for monitoring and review of systems and practices with the aim of continuous improvement. These management staff were aware of areas that required improvement and had identified action to be taken to address these issues.
  • There was an open culture within the practice and staff were actively encouraged to raise concerns and suggestions for improvement. The practice philosophy and practice charter were available for patients. This document included information regarding access to the service, waiting times and complaints. The practice had a clear vision to deliver high quality care and good outcomes for patients. Staff demonstrated a person-centred approach and through discussions it was obvious that delivering high quality care to meet patient’s needs was of paramount importance.
  • There was an active Patient Participation Group (PPG) who met on a regular basis. The PPG reported an excellent relationship with the practice and confirmed that the practice listened and acted upon suggestions made by them. Learning events requested by the PPG, which related to the needs of the practice population had been organised. One PPG member had been involved in the recent employment of the Business manager.

We saw the following areas of outstanding practice:

The practice provided a good range of nurse led clinics which supported the role of the GP. Patients with long term conditions were allocated to patient care advisors. Patient care advisors were responsible for ensuring that a robust system of patient calling for long term conditions was in place. Each member of the team had their own list of patients. Patients would be contacted by telephone and then letter. A system of recording contacts and attempted contacts with patients had been implemented.

The practice encouraged membership of their Patient Participation Group (PPG) through posters displayed in the waiting room and information on their website. The PPG met on a regular basis and received support with meetings from practice staff who also attended these meetings. Educational events were organised by practice staff for the PPG and recent events had included pain management, stroke and resuscitation training. Guest speakers had been invited to talk about the local alcohol services, a urology talk, eating disorders and dementia. Some of the guest speakers had been suggested by the PPG and some by the GP according to the needs of the practice population. The PPG confirmed that they were informed and involved in any changes at the practice. One of the PPG members had been involved in the recent employment of the Business Manager. PPG members had been invited to meet candidates prior to their interview and to give feedback to the practice manager and lead GP.

However, there were also areas where the practice should make improvements.

  • Ensure that recruitment processes are followed so that information required under current legislation is obtained prior to employment.
  • Ensure the appraisal system for nursing staff includes personal development plans.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice