• Doctor
  • GP practice

Primary Care Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

6 High Street, West Bromwich, B70 6JX (0121) 612 2525

Provided and run by:
Dr. N U Haque & Partners

Important: The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 19 May 2025 to 20 May 2025. The Primary Care Centre is a GP practice and delivers services to 3700 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 41.84% of patients are White, 37.54% Asian, 10.53% Black, 5.65% Other and 4.44% Mixed. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 1st decile (1 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 improved their learning culture and people could raise concerns. Systems had been implemented to ensure incidents were thoroughly investigated. 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. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed the majority of medicines well; however, we found further improvements were needed in the management of long term conditions and medicines that required regular monitoring to ensure people received the appropriate reviews and care.

EFFECTIVE: Improvements were seen in how people’s health conditions were managed, however further strengthening was required to ensure people were involved in assessments of their needs and the appropriate monitoring was in place. We found clinical supervision was now in place to monitor staff in clinical roles. Staff involved in assessments ensured people’s communication, personal and health needs were met. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice, however we found evidence based guidance was not always followed. 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.

CARING: 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.

RESPONSIVE: We found significant improvements in how people were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to 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.

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 inspection, the provider had formed a new partnership with 3 other GPs to further develop the practice, ensure they were sustainable succession plans in place and to improve the overall quality of services. A new practice manager had also been employed to oversee the day to day running of the practice and provide support to staff within their roles. 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 worked with the local community 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 12 Safe Care and Treatment, 16 Receiving and Acting on Complaints and 17 Good Governance.

This service was placed in Special Measures on 22 November 2023. The provider demonstrated improvements 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.

17 August 2023

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive at Primary Care Centre on 17 August 2023. Overall, the practice is rated as inadequate.

Safe - inadequate

Effective - inadequate

Caring - inadequate

Responsive – requires improvement

Well-led - inadequate

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities. This was a new registration and the practice had not been inspected previously under this provider.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting clinical staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • The practice did not have appropriate systems in place for the safe management of medicines. This included an ineffective system for the management of safety alerts, as actions had not been taken to ensure patients were informed of potential risks with certain medicines.
  • Patients on high-risk medicines were not being monitored or reviewed regularly. We found examples of alerts on patients records to inform the clinical team that a review was required, however this had not been actioned.
  • The process for reviewing patients with long term conditions needed improvement to ensure all patients received the appropriate reviews.
  • The process for sharing information with the wider practice team needed to be formalised to ensure all staff were included in the sharing of learning outcomes.
  • We found safeguarding registers were not accurate and were unable to gain assurances that there was effective clinical oversight.
  • The practice were unable to demonstrate effective supervision of staff carrying out their roles to ensure they were acting within their competencies.
  • On reviewing the responses to patients’ complaints, we found examples where the provider had lacked empathy and respect for the patients’ concerns.

We found breaches of regulations. The provider must:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.
  • Ensure there is an effective system for identifying, receiving, recording, handling and responding to complaints by patients and other persons in relation to the carrying on of the regulated activity.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

The provider should:

  • Implement processes to improve on screening and immunisation targets.
  • Take steps to identify the number of carers registered at the practice.

I am placing this service in special measures. Services placed in special measures will be inspected again within six months. If insufficient improvements have been made such that there remains a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures to begin the process of preventing the provider from operating the service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration within six months if they do not improve.

The service will be kept under review and if needed could be escalated to urgent enforcement action. Where necessary, another inspection will be conducted within a further six months, and if there is not enough improvement, we will move to close the service by adopting our proposal to remove this location or cancel the provider’s registration. Special measures will give people who use the service the reassurance that the care they get should improve.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care