During an assessment under our new approach
Date of Assessment: 15 April 2026. Newcastle Premier Health is an independent consulting doctor service. The service provides privately funded medical care and is registered with the Care Quality Commission to deliver the regulated activities of treatment of disease, disorder or injury and diagnostic and screening procedures.
Newcastle Premier Health delivers a range of services, some of which fall outside CQC regulation (for example, occupational health services). This assessment considered only those services that fall within the scope of CQC‑regulated activity.
This assessment considered the characteristics of people using the service, the context in which the service operates, and how this influenced service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided within the quality statements section of this report.
This was the first inspection at which the service received a rating following registration at its current location.
The service demonstrated an open learning culture and staff felt able to raise concerns, with incidents investigated appropriately by managers. However, infection prevention and control (IPC) arrangements were not fully effective. Oversight of staff immunisation status and risk assessments was not fully established, and gaps were identified in mandatory and role‑specific training. Emergency medicines were not fully available or readily accessible.
People were involved in assessments of their needs, which took account of their communication, personal and health needs. Care was delivered in line with the latest evidence and good practice, and staff worked with relevant agencies to support positive outcomes and smooth transitions between services. People were supported to understand their care and treatment to enable informed consent, and best‑interest decisions were made where appropriate.
People were 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.
People were involved in decisions about their care and received clear, accessible information. The service was easy to access and responsive to people’s individual needs. People knew how to raise concerns and felt confident these would be listened to. Arrangements promoted fair and equal access to care, and people were supported to make informed choices about their treatment.
Leaders and staff shared a vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, and staff felt able to provide feedback and were treated equally, without fear of bullying or harassment. However, governance and oversight arrangements were not consistently effective. Systems to monitor IPC, staff immunisation status, training compliance, recruitment checks and emergency preparedness were not fully embedded. Audit and quality improvement activity was limited and not consistently used to demonstrate sustained improvement. Although leaders were receptive to feedback and had begun taking action to address identified gaps, further work was required to strengthen assurance processes and support continuous improvement.
We found a breach of regulation in relation to good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.