The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

OHP-Leach Heath Medical Centre Also known as Leach Heath Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

32 Leach Heath Lane, Rubery, Rednal, Birmingham, West Midlands, B45 9BU (0121) 453 3516

Provided and run by:
Our Health Partnership

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about OHP-Leach Heath Medical Centre 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 OHP-Leach Heath Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

During an assessment under our new approach

OHP-Leach Heath Medical Centre is a NHS GP practice which provides primary care services to patients in the Rubery area of Birmingham. The practice is rated as Good overall, with all key questions rated as good. We carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive at OHP-Leach Heath Medical Centre on the 6 March 2024. We carried out the assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet peoples demands for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers. We recognise the work that GP practices have been engaged in to continue to provide safe, quality care to the people they serve. We know staff are carrying this out whilst the demand for general practice remains exceptionally high, with more appointments being provided than ever. However, within this challenging context, access to general practice remains a concern for people. Our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. The assessment of the quality statement equity of access includes looking at what practices are doing innovatively to improve patient access to primary care and sharing this information to drive improvement. We found that the practice had organised services to meet patients’ needs, particularly those who were most likely to have difficulty accessing care. However, the practice did not fully demonstrate that it was proactive in using patient feedback and other information to monitor and improve access. Patient feedback indicated that they found it difficult to access appointments. There were no formal action plans in place and any actions taken were not reflected in the GP patient survey data or in other sources of patient feedback.

20 December 2017

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as requires improvement overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

Are services effective? – Requires Improvement

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Requires Improvement

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Requires Improvement

People with long-term conditions – Requires Improvement

Families, children and young people – Requires Improvement

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Requires Improvement

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Requires Improvement

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Requires Improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at OHP- Leach Heath Medical Centre on 20 December 2017. The practice was previously inspected in February 2016 and was rated as good overall. The practice changed provider in July 2017 and is now being inspected under a new provider registration (Our Health Partnership).

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had experienced difficulties due to redevelopment of the local area and the loss of clinical staff that had placed additional pressures on staff workload.
  • The practice had effective systems and processes in place to keep patients safe and safeguarded from abuse. This included safeguarding arrangements for children and vulnerable adults, the management of medicines and infection control. However we identified some weaknesses in recruitment processes.
  • The practice did not have effective systems and processes for managing and monitoring risks in relation to health and safety and the premises.
  • The practice had established systems for reporting and recording significant events and for learning from them.
  • Records seen demonstrated that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Patient outcomes in relation to the quality outcome framework showed the practice was performing in line with other practices locally and nationally for many long term conditions.
  • Practice staff worked with a range of health and care professionals in the delivery of patient care and was proactive in identifying opportunities to promote and support patients to lead healthier lives.
  • We found systems for providing staff with ongoing support were inconsistent. This included effective induction and appraisal processes.
  • Feedback from patients from the national GP patient survey and the CQC patient comment cards showed that they felt they were treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect and felt involved in their care and treatment. Patient satisfaction with consultations with clinical staff and helpfulness of reception staff was comparable to local and national averages.
  • Patient feedback on access to appointments was mostly in line with other practices with the exception of ease of access through the telephone system.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available to patients. However, complaints were not managed in a consistent way.
  • We identified weaknesses in the governance arrangements in the management of some risks and in supporting staff.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Ensure appropriate recruitment checks are in place for all staff employed and where relevant registration with professional bodies are routinely monitored.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care by means of effective systems for the management of risks in relation to the premises (including fire safety, legionella, control of substances hazardous to health and arrangements for business continuity).
  • Ensure appropriate provision to ensure staff receive appropriate support, training, supervision and appraisals for the duties they are employed to perform.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Raise awareness of the Accessible Information Standard so that staff are able to respond to this. Including systems for alerting staff of vulnerable patients so that their needs could be addressed. For example carers and those with specific needs; for example, hearing or sensory difficulties.
  • Review medicines for use in an emergency and undertake risk assessment for recommended medicines not routinely stocked.
  • Continue to address and improve areas where the practice is an outlier in relation to patient outcomes and prescribing.
  • Continue to take action and monitor progress in response to patient feedback regarding telephone access.
  • Review system for recording verbal complaints to support learning and improved documentation to ensure complaints are responded to in a consistent and timely way.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice