Lees Medical Practice

Updated 10 June 2025

Date of Assessment: 16 July 2025 to 21 July 2025. Lees Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers service to 5066 under a contract held with NHS England. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is 2. Population areas are divided into 10 groups (or deciles), numbered 1 to 10. The lower the number of the practice deprivation score (or decile), the more deprived the population, relative to the local area.

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.

The service had processes to promote a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training; thorough induction and appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well, however, people did not always feel involved in planning changes.

Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Systems were in place to enable staff to involve those who were important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity. People were involved in assessments of their needs; however, people also told us they often did not immediately know the next steps of their care pathway.

We saw people being treated with kindness and compassion by all staff. Clinical staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. They treated people as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing. However, a significant number of people who gave feedback indicated front of house staff were not always kind and helpful.

The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback; however, they were not always supported to understand when the service took concerns seriously and acted on it.

The service took steps to ease access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. 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.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers could do more to work with the local organisations to find ways to improve the relationship with the community. However, they worked with other local GP practices to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas.

There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

Since the last inspection, the practice had made improvements and is no longer in breach of regulations, Fit and proper persons employed, Good Governance and Safe Care and Treatment.

We found that policies concerning staff recruitment, complaints and fire safety had been reviewed and were now being followed.

We found systems for managing significant events and complaints were now effective, however, some elements of complaints management needed to be further strengthened.

Updated 10 June 2025

We received some positive feedback about the service, however, people were mostly negative about their experiences of using the service. The 2025 NHS National GP Patient Survey showed people were mostly dissatisfied with most aspects of the service delivered by Lees Medical Practice. People who returned the CQC Give Feedback on Care (GFOC) feedback form requested by CQC, provided mostly negative feedback. People complained about difficulty with accessing a practitioner of their choice, timeliness of appointments and the attitude of front of house staff. In these complaints, people often also told us the practice had taken action to resolve complaints, by providing additional support or explanation. However, these patients still felt a sense of dissatisfaction with the practice and sometimes related negative incidents and experiences concerning their extended family. The NHS Friends and Family Test for the period May to June 2025, showed a large majority of people (73%) felt the practice was either good or very good. The minority of patients who completed GFOC forms providing positive feedback, stated, the practice worked hard to make improvements to access, staff, especially the clinicians, were kind, gentle and knowledgeable and the leaders worked in collaboration with other service providers to meet the needs of vulnerable people. People also described prompt care and treatment for themselves and family members when needed. There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. Representatives from the PPG described how managers made changes because of feedback.