• Doctor
  • GP practice

Wallis Avenue

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Surgery, Wallis Avenue, Maidstone, Kent, ME15 9JJ (01622) 754854

Provided and run by:
Dr Swathy Susan Alexander

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

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 31 March 2016

Wallis Avenue Surgery is situated in Maidstone, Kent and has a registered patient population of approximately 3,500.

The practice staff consist of one GP (female), one practice manager, two practice nurses (female), one healthcare assistant (female) as well as administration and reception staff. The practice also employs locum GPs directly and through locum agencies. There is a reception and a waiting area on the ground floor. All patient areas are accessible to patients with mobility issues as well as parents with children and babies.

The practice is not a training or teaching practice (teaching practices take medical students and training practices have GP trainees and F2 doctors).

The practice has a general medical services (GMS) contract with NHS England for delivering primary care services to local communities.

Primary medical services are provided Monday to Friday between the hours of 8am to 1pm and 2pm to 6.30pm, and Friday 8.30am to 6pm. Extended hours surgeries are offered Monday and Wednesday 6.30pm to 7.30pm. There are a range of clinics for all age groups as well as the availability of specialist nursing treatment and support. There are arrangements with other providers (IC24) to deliver services to patients outside of surgery hours.

Services are provided from The Surgery, Wallis Avenue, Maidstone, Kent, ME15 9JJ, only.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wallis Avenue on 6 and 11 May 2015. Breaches of the legal requirements were found. Following the comprehensive inspection, the practice wrote to us to tell us what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches.

We undertook this focussed inspection on 2 February 2016, to check that the practice had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met the legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting ‘all reports’ link for Wallis Avenue on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people with long-term conditions. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of families, children and young people. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

Older people

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of older people. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of working age people (including those recently retired and students). The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 31 March 2016

At our previous comprehensive inspection on 6 and 11 May 2015 the practice had been rated as requires improvement for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The provider had been rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led services and good for providing caring and responsive services. The resulting overall rating applied to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.

At our focussed follow-up inspection on 2 February 2016, the practice provided records and information to demonstrate that the requirements had been met. The provider is rated as good for providing safe, effective and well-led services. The resulting overall rating applies to everyone using the practice, including this patient population group.