• Doctor
  • Urgent care service or mobile doctor

Urgent Care Centre

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Doncaster Royal Infirmary, Armthorpe Road, Doncaster, South Yorkshire, DN2 5LT (01302) 366666

Provided and run by:
FCMS (NW) Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 16 June 2026

Doncaster Urgent Care Centre is an urgent treatment centre provided by FCMS NW Limited under a contract held with NHS England. It is co-located with the urgent and emergency care department at Doncaster Royal Infirmary which is provided by Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Most patients access the out-of-hours service by calling NHS 111. Patients who contact the service may be provided with advice, receive a telephone consultation, an appointment or a home visit, depending on their needs. Other patients may access the service by walking into the Urgent and Emergency Care (UEC) department (we will refer to this as ‘The Front Door’ for the purposes of this report) at Doncaster Royal Infirmary and being redirected to the urgent treatment centre waiting area, after booking in at UEC’s reception.

The provider is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of Treatment of Disease, Disorder and Injury; and Transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely. The service is open 24 hours per day, 7 days a week (including bank holidays). Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

We issued warning notices following an inspection in December 2025. These were for breaches of regulations relating to safe care and treatment and good governance.

We carried out this 16 June 2026 announced assessment of 7 quality statements to assess compliance with the issues identified in the warning notices. The service was not in breach of any further legal regulations at this inspection. We saw improvements at this inspection in the areas of safe, effective and well led, however, the provider will remain rated as requires improvement until we complete a further, more comprehensive inspection, of the service.
 

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 9 December 2025 to 10 December 2025 Doncaster Urgent Care Centre is an urgent treatment centre provided by FCMS NW Limited under a contract held with NHS England. It is co-located with the urgent and emergency care department at Doncaster Royal Infirmary which is provided by Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Most patients access the out-of-hours service by calling NHS 111. Patients who contact the service may be provided with advice, receive a telephone consultation, an appointment or a home visit, depending on their needs. Other patients may access the service by walking into the Urgent and Emergency Care (UEC) department (we will refer to this as ‘The Front Door’ for the purposes of this report) at Doncaster Royal Infirmary and being redirected to the urgent treatment centre waiting area, after completing a digital triage tool in UEC’s reception. The provider is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of Treatment of Disease, Disorder and Injury; and Transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely. The service is open 24 hours per day, 7 days a week (including bank holidays) The co-located UEC department, delivered by a separate provider, was assessed simultaneously by a separate CQC inspection team. The findings of their assessment are detailed in that separate location report. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

SAFE: The service lacked a good learning culture and people did not always feel able to raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents but did not use this to inform wider learning and drive improvements. People were not always protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks, but they did not always feel that escalation of those risks resulted in positive changes. The facilities and equipment did not meet the needs of people, the environment was not always clean and well-maintained, and risks were not mitigated. There were not enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and appraisals, but not all clinicians benefitted from the same standard or regularity of competency checks. Medicines were not well managed.
EFFECTIVE: Assessments took account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was typically based on latest evidence and good practice, but not consistently. During our assessment, we identified serious concerns regarding the operation and oversight of the provider’s streaming and initial triage process, which had not been identified as a risk. An ineffective streaming and triage process poses a significant risk to service users as they may not receive the care and treatment they require, in a timeframe that is appropriate for their condition.
CARING: Staff protected the privacy and dignity of patients where possible. The service aspired to support staff wellbeing, but staff did not always feel listened to. The physical environment was hot and there was a significant lack of privacy, especially at busy times.
RESPONSIVE: The service did not always provide information in a way that people could understand. People knew how to give feedback about their care and treatment. There were delays in care and treatment and the provider was trying to address this through a newly implemented streaming protocol. Some staff we spoke to did not feel equipped to deliver this without supporting governance.
WELL-LED: Leaders had a vision and culture to nurture an environment of inspiration, innovation and disruption so that the people within our world receive exceptional care for this generation and the next. Leaders were not always visible, or knowledgeable in clinical matters. Locally, managers were supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff reported that they did not always feel supported to give feedback without fear of bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There was an aspiration of continuous improvement, but staff were not given time and resources to try new ideas.

We found breaches of regulation in relation to Regulation 12 Safe Care and Treatment and Regulation 17 Good Governance. We have asked the provider to take prompt action to address the concerns identified during this assessment.
 

24 September 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of the Urgent Care Centre on 28 November and 1 December 2016. The overall rating for the service was requires improvement with good for providing effective, caring and responsive services and requires improvement for safety and being well-led. The full comprehensive report on the previous inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for the Urgent Care Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was carried out on 24 September 2017 to confirm that the provider had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection in 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the service is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The provider had reviewed the systems in place to minimise risks to patient safety. In particular, all relevant staff had now completed the chaperone training and a self directed training pack had been developed to support the online learning.  There was a system in place to ensure equipment was maintained to an appropriate standard and in line with manufacturers’ guidance.
  • The provider had a process to check agency, bank and sessional staff met recruitment requirements.
  • Staff interviewed demonstrated they understood their responsibilities regarding safeguarding, who the leads were and were trained to the relevant level.
  • The provider had reviewed the arrangements for managing medicines at the service, including availability of emergency medicines and storage of vaccines to ensure they were stored correctly and available when needed. Blank prescription forms and pads were now securely stored and there were systems in place to monitor their use.
  • There were arrangements in place to to keep staff informed and up-to-date.The provider reviewed how updates and alerts were shared with all staff and implemented a web-based risk management database to record all risk management activity, including incidents, complaints and queries.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff were aware who the  leads were. The service had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.The service proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

28/11/2016 and 01/12/2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the Urgent Care Centre on 28/11/2016 and 01/12/2016. Overall the service is rated as requires improvement.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for recording, reporting and learning from significant events.
  • Most risks to patients were assessed and well managed with the exception of those relating to medicines management.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and managed in a timely way.. The service met the National Quality Requirements.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • There was a system in place that enabled staff access to patient records and to communicate patient information with other relevant services e.g. the patient’s own GP.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • The service worked proactively with other organisations and providers to develop services that supported alternatives to hospital admission where appropriate and improved the patient experience.
  • The service had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. The vehicles used for home visits were clean and well equipped.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The service proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure all those who act as chaperones are trained for the role and chaperone information is available to patients.
  • Ensure stocks of medicines are regularly checked, appropriately disposed of and prescription pads are tracked through the service.
  • Ensure the arrangements for accessing controlled drugs from midnight to 7am are appropriate and staff know how to access these. Ensure the stock lists for controlled drugs are updated so staff know which drugs are kept in each area.
  • Review driver checks in place to ensure they are fit for their role.
  • Review the process for DBS checks for sessional or agency staff and if the medical performers list is used, take steps to assure that the checks are adequate from other agencies such as NHS England.
  • Ensure the system in place to ensure equipment is maintained and calibrated is effective.
  • Ensure staff have access to all the policies and procedures as required.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are

  • Emergency care practitioners should have Level 3 training in child safeguarding:
  • Review local leadership arrangements to engage local staff.
  • Review arrangements for briefing agency staff who work regularly at the service so staff are up to date with changes to policies and procedures and are aware of who the service leads are.
  • Review how information is cascaded about lead roles e.g. infection control

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice