• Doctor
  • GP practice

Tulasi Medical Centre

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

10 Bennetts Castle Lane, Dagenham, Essex, RM8 3XU (020) 8590 1773

Provided and run by:
Dr Ravali Krishna Goriparthi

Important: The provider of this service changed - see old profile
Important: We are carrying out a review of quality at Tulasi Medical Centre. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

All Inspections

14 December 2022, 19 December 2022, 21 December 2022 and 9 February 2023

During a routine inspection

This was an un-rated inspection at this service to review the provider’s actions following our enforcement action.

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Tulasi Medical Centre under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 to follow-up on concerns we found during our previous inspection on 25 May 2022 and 15 June 2022. Following our previous inspection, we undertook urgent civil enforcement action to suspend the service for a six-month duration by issuing a Section 31 notice under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

At this inspection carried out over a period of four days; 14 December 2022, 19 December 2022, 21 December 2022 and 9 February 2023, we took a primary medical services specialist team to check whether the service had made sufficient improvements to their systems and processes since we imposed the six-month suspension under Section 31 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. This report includes evidence gathered by our PMS team.

Following the inspection, we undertook further civil enforcement action, under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, by:

Imposing an urgent suspension, of 6 months duration by issuing a Section 31 notice under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Our key findings were:

  • The provider had made some improvements to the safety and governance systems and processes in the practice. However, we also found that the provider did not have all the necessary systems and processes established and operating effectively to ensure compliance with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. There continued to be a risk of harm to patients due to the absence of all the necessary systems and processes being in place, or operating effectively which could adversely impact the quality and safety of the service being delivered at the practice.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

• Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.

• Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

25 MAY 2022 and 15 JUNE 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced inspection at Tulasi Medical Centre on 25 May 2022, followed by a remote review on 15 June 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Inadequate.

Safe - Inadequate

Effective - Inadequate

Caring - Inadequate

Responsive - Inadequate

Well-led - Inadequate

Following our previous inspection on 22 June 2017, the practice was rated good overall but required improvement in safe care and treatment. The practice was found in breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act Regulations 2014. A follow up inspection for the safe key question was carried out on 10 May 2018 and the practice was rated good in the safe key question.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Tulasi Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

We carried out this inspection in May and June 2022 in response to concerns raised directly with CQC. This related to safety systems and processes and governance of the practice. In response to these concerns, we initially carried out an unannounced site visit inspection on 25 May 2022, followed by a remote clinical records review on 15 June 2022 and further evidence gathering on 21 June 2022.

This report covers our findings in relation to both the review and inspection.

How we carried out the inspection/review

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection and subsequent remote review was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing and via telephone
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • An inspection site visit of the main site and one branch surgery

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 have rated this practice as Inadequate overall

We found that:

  • The practice did not have adequate systems, practices and processes to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • There were gaps in systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient safety.
  • Patients’ needs were not assessed and care and treatment was not delivered in line with current legislation.
  • The practice did not have a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity.
  • The practice was unable to demonstrate that staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • Staff did not always work effectively together and with other organisations to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Staff were not consistent and proactive in helping patients to live healthier lives.
  • The practice demonstrated that it always obtained consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance but this required improvement.
  • Staff did not always treat patients with kindness, respect and compassion. Feedback from patients was negative about the way staff treated people.
  • Services did not always meet patients’ needs.
  • People were not able to access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • Leaders could not demonstrate that they had the capacity and skills to deliver high quality sustainable care.
  • The overall governance arrangements were inadequate.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

On 22 June 2022, Tulasi Medical Centre was issued with an urgent notice to suspend their registration as a service provider in respect of regulated activities. This notice was served under Section 31 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. This notice of urgent suspension of their registration was given because we believe that a person will or may be exposed to the risk of harm if we do not take this action.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

22 June 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Tulasi Medical Centre on 22 June 2017. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice had systems in place to minimise risks to patient safety, however we identified safety concerns in relation to vaccine storage and fire safety.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients we spoke with said they found it easy to make an appointment with a GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure there is an effective system in place for minimising fire risk through the regular testing of fire alarms, and by conducting fire drills in accordance with practice policy.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Review arrangements for ensuring the temperatures of vaccine fridges are routinely checked across all sites.
  • Continue to review and monitor performance against Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) indicators, to improve outcomes for patients with diabetes.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice