The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Private GP Care Birmingham

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

4 St Marys Road, Smethwick, West Midlands, B67 5DG (0121) 340 0181

Provided and run by:
ZID Medical Services Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

30 April 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Private GP Care Birmingham on 30 April 2019. This was part of our inspection programme, in order to rate independent health services throughout England.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspected this service on 22 March 2018 and found breaches in regulation. As a result, we issued requirement notices as legal requirements were not being met and asked the provider to send was a report of the actions they were going to take to meet legal requirements. We checked these areas as part of the follow-up inspection on 25 July 2018 and found that these and found this had been resolved. The full comprehensive report of our previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Private GP Care Birmingham on our website at

Private GP Care offered private GP services to a wide range of patients. The population group of patients were few in number and transient in nature.

This service was registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of all of the services it provided.

The main GP was 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.

Our key findings were :

  • Systems were in place to support the safety of patients and ensure patients were safeguarded from abuse.
  • The provider demonstrated a program of quality improvement activities used to routinely review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.
  • The provider ensured that emergency medicines and equipment were in place and that chaperones were available. The provider had updated their policy to include offering alternative appointments if chaperones were not available.
  • The provider had established systems to support the gathering and analysis of patient feedback but was unable to demonstrate any feedback relating to how much patients felt involved in their care and treatment, or how satisfied they felt regarding access to care and treatment. We were told that this was due to the low numbers of patients seen.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • The provider should continue to review systems to ensure that clinical waste is managed appropriately.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

25 July 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced focused inspection on 25 July 2018 at GP Private Care Birmingham. This inspection was in response to a previous comprehensive inspection on 22 March 2018 where we found this service was not providing safe, effective and well led care in accordance with the relevant regulations and breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 were identified.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection on 22 March 2018; by selecting the 'all reports' link for GP Private Care Birmingham on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At this inspection 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 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 service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

CQC inspected the service on 22 March 2018 and asked the provider to make improvements regarding breaches identified in Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act Regulated Activities Regulations 2014 Safe care and Treatment and Regulation 17 Health and Social Care Act Regulated Activities Regulations 2014 Good governance. We checked these areas as part of this focused inspection and found these breaches had been resolved.

This service is registered with the CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 to provide the regulated activities of diagnostic and screening procedures and treatment of disease, disorder and injury. This service offers a private consulting clinic specialising in GP consultations and a sexual health service.

Our key findings were:

  • The provider had reviewed and embedded their systems and processes to keep patients safe. This included mitigating the risks previously identified in relation to unforeseen medical emergencies and the use of chaperones.
  • The provider had introduced an online satisfaction questionnaire to gather patient feedback of the services provided.
  • The GP provider told us that they saw on average two patients a month currently and the regulated service offered accounted for less than 5% of the working week.
  • Due to the low numbers of patients currently accessing the service, the provider had not completed any quality improvement activity, however they had a plan to monitor quality when more patients had utilised the service.
  • The provider had updated their website to include a complaints form and the complaints process.

22 March 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 22 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 not providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The impact of our concerns is minor for patients using the service, in terms of the quality and safety of clinical care. The likelihood of this occurring in the future is low once it has been put right.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was not providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The impact of our concerns is minor for patients using the service, in terms of the quality and safety of clinical care. The likelihood of this occurring in the future is low once it has been put right.

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 not providing well led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The impact of our concerns is minor for patients using the service, in terms of the quality and safety of clinical care. The likelihood of this occurring in the future is low once it has been put right.

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 service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Our key findings were:

  • There were systems in place for the overall management of significant events and incidents.
  • Although the provider had some systems and processes in place to keep patients safe some of these were were not sufficiently effective or embedded. This included risks in relation to unforeseen medical emergencies and the use of chaperones.
  • There was an overarching governance framework which supported the delivery of good quality care.
  • The provider demonstrated that they understood their responsibilities and had received training on safeguarding children and vulnerable adults relevant to their role.
  • The premises appeared well maintained and visibly clean and tidy.
  • The practice had not sought feedback from patients and the public. The provider told us that due to the low number of patients that had used the service since opening, they had not implemented a system to gather patients’ views and no audits had been completed to support the delivery of safe care and treatment.
  • Services were planned and delivered to take into account the needs of different patient groups and to help ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care.
  • The provider had established a good network within the private healthcare sector for advice and support if needed.
  • The GP provider told us that currently the regulated service offered accounted for less than 5% of his working week.
  • The provider had effective systems for obtaining consent and patient information was well documented.
  • There was a complaints process in place, however the provider told us they had received no complaints since opening the practice.

We identified regulations that were not being met and the provider must:

  • Ensure effective systems and processes are established to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.
  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients

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

  • Review and improve the process for advising patients of the complaints process.
  • Review and take steps to improve the process for obtaining patient feedback.
  • Improve the current process to ensure chaperones used by the service have had the necessary training and checks completed.

You can see full details of the regulations not being met at the end of this report.