Great Barr Medical Centre

Date of Assessment: 29 to 30 July 2026. Great Barr Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 10,436 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 59.41% of patients are White, 24.15% Asian, 9.12% Black, 4.09% Mixed and 3.24% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 6th decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the patients using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

SAFE: The service had significantly improved and areas identified at the previous assessment in 2025 had been addressed with effective processes now in place to monitor the safety of the practice. These included improvements in the monitoring of medicines, clinical supervision and the maintenance of the safeguarding registers. There was a strong and embedded culture of learning and incidents were investigated thoroughly ensuring that outcomes were shared with the team to mitigate future risks. Staff understood and managed risks. Systems had been strengthened to support safe care. The environment, facilities, and equipment were well maintained to meet the diverse needs of patients. Workforce planning was effective, ensuring there were sufficient numbers of skilled, qualified, and experienced staff to deliver consistently high-quality care. Leaders showed a strong commitment to staff development and wellbeing, with training, regular appraisals, opportunities for staff to learn new roles and staff recognition. We saw improvements in the management of medicines with clinical supervision embedded to ensure staff had the appropriate support and well-established systems were now in place that reflected best practice. Patients were involved in decisions about their care, including changes to medicines, demonstrating a personalised, collaborative, and patient-centred approach.

EFFECTIVE: The service had improved since the previous assessment in 2025, with systems having been strengthened to ensure patients received effective, co-ordinated care. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of patients’ communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in patients’ care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure patients understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

CARING: Staff protected patients’ privacy and dignity. Patients were fully involved in decisions about their care and treatment and were supported to make informed choices. The service also demonstrated a positive and supportive culture for staff wellbeing, recognising that a valued and supported workforce is fundamental to delivering high-quality, compassionate care.

RESPONSIVE: The service provided information patients could understand. Patients knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. Access to the service was designed to be inclusive and responsive, with a clear commitment to eliminating discrimination and reducing barriers to care. The service took proactive steps to reduce health and care inequalities, using training, data, and patient feedback to continually refine and improve their approach. Feedback from patients was positive about accessing the services provided and this was also reflected in the results of the GP national patient survey. Care planning was collaborative, with patients fully involved in shaping their care and supported to understand all available options, including the right to decline or withdraw from treatment.

WELL-LED: The service had made significant improvements since the last assessment in 2025. Leaders and staff demonstrated a shared vision based on a culture of openness, trust, and continuous learning. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable, and forward thinking, proactively anticipating future challenges and driving innovation. They were approachable and supportive, creating an environment where staff felt valued, empowered, and able to develop and excel in their roles. There was a clear commitment to equality and inclusion and responsibilities were clearly defined and well understood across the team, contributing to a co-ordinated and effective service. Governance processes had been reviewed and further strengthened to identify, manage and mitigate risks. Leaders worked collaboratively with the local community and key partners to design and deliver services that met the evolving needs of the population. They were receptive to new ideas and fostered a strong culture of continuous improvement. Staff were supported with dedicated time, resources, and autonomy to test and implement innovative approaches, driving sustained improvement and the delivery of consistently high-quality care.

Date of Assessment: 2 June 2025 to 3 June 2025. Great Barr Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 10640 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 59.41% of patients are White, 24.15% Asian, 9.12% Black, 4.09% Mixed and 3.24% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the sixth decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

SAFE: The service had significantly improved; however, we found some areas required further strengthening to ensure risks were mitigated. Staff managed the majority of medicines well; but further improvements were needed in the management of long term conditions and medicines that required regular monitoring or review. We also found safeguarding registers required a review to ensure they were up to date and contained all the relevant information. The practice had improved their systems to share learning to ensure incidents were thoroughly investigated. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained. A review of staff competencies had been completed to ensure there were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience to carry out their roles effectively, but as identified at the previous assessment in November 2024, some staff continued to undertake clinical assessments without the appropriate qualifications or clinical supervision. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals.

EFFECTIVE: We found the care and treatment of patients had improved, however systems needed to be strengthened to ensure all risks were mitigated. The provider had increased the clinical team to provide an effective service for patients and to ensure patients were assessed and provided with appropriate care and treatment, however we continued to find concerns with long term condition management.

Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. We were unable to gain assurances that staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people, took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

CARING: The practice had completed an inhouse survey to gather patient feedback in March 2025, which showed some improvements in people’s satisfaction with the service. We observed people being treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

RESPONSIVE: We found improvements in the management of complaints and saw evidence to demonstrate that learning from complaints was shared with the practice team to drive improvements. At the last assessment we found that the practice did not always organise and deliver services to meet people’s needs and patients could not always access appointments in a timely way. The provider had increased the clinical team to improve the services for patients. People we spoke with on the day of the assessment told us they had seen improvements, and this was also reflected in the comments we received from staff. The practice had a duty doctor available to provide advice and to deal with urgent requests.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

WELL-LED: Significant improvements were seen in how the practice was being managed and how leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Since the last assessment, the provider had formed a new partnership with 1 other GP and 2 non-clinical partners to further develop the practice and implement plans to improve the overall quality of the services provided. Governance arrangements had been strengthened to mitigate risks; however further improvements were needed to ensure all risks were mitigated. We continue to identify concerns regarding the management of staff in clinical roles, particularly in relation to the lack of clinical oversight as well as gaps in staff competencies and knowledge. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us leaders were visible and they felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment.

Since the last assessment, the practice had made improvements, however we found continued breaches of regulation in relation to:

Regulation 12 Safe Care and Treatment and Regulation 17 Good Governance.We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

This service was placed in Special Measures on 7 May 2024. The provider demonstrated improvements that have been made. The service is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures.