The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

English Institute of Sport - Loughborough

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Loughborough Performance Centre, Loughborough University, Loughborough, LE11 3TU (01225) 466446

Provided and run by:
UK Sports Institute

All Inspections

12 Dec 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This service is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced focussed inspection at English Institute of Sport – Loughborough on 12 December 2022 to follow up on breaches of regulation we found during our previous inspection. We inspected the key questions of safe, effective and well led. The key questions of caring and responsive were rated as good at the last inspection and were not inspected as part of this follow up inspection. Their previous rating of good still stands.

At the previous inspection in July 2022 we found a breach of Regulation 17, good governance, regarding the oversight of training, premises and infection prevention and control. The provider was rated as inadequate overall with ratings of inadequate in safe and well led, and requires improvement for effective. In this inspection we found improvements had been made to effectively comply with Regulation 17.


This service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The operations manager is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The location is registered to carry out diagnostic and screening regulated activities.

Our key findings were:

  • Governance processes had been put in place for service leaders to have oversight of requirements within the service.
  • There were processes in place to manage infection prevention and control, and staff had received infection control training.
  • There was a system to identify training requirements for staff and leaders who had oversight of training completion.
  • There was evidence of systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation. For example, clinical audits and learning from incidents were being completed within the service and at a national level.
  • Staff dealt with athletes with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The service organised and delivered services to allow athletes to access care and treatment in a timely way.

I am taking this service out of special measures. This recognises the significant improvements that have been made to the quality of care provided by this service.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

13 May 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Inadequate overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Inadequate

Are services effective? – Requires improvement

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Inadequate

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at English Institute of Sport – Loughborough as part of our inspection programme to give a rating for independent health services.


This service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

At the time of our inspection, there was no registered manager within the service as their previous registered manager had left the organisation in March 2022. The provider had not yet completed the application process for the new manager to be registered. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The location is registered to carry our diagnostic and screening regulated activites.

Our key findings were:

  • There was a lack of oversight from management within the service. Managers were not able to demonstrate they had oversight of requirements within the service.
  • There was no process in place to manage infection prevention and control, and staff had not received infection control training.
  • There was a lack of evidence of training for staff.
  • There was no evidence of systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation. For example, clinical audits and learning from incidents and complaints.
  • Staff dealt with athletes with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The service organised and delivered services to allow athletes to access care and treatment in a timely way

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

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

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.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

17 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We did not speak with people using this service during our inspection visit because we were unable to interrupt their training schedule. We gained information about the service in a number of ways including looking at records and speaking to staff on duty.

We found people were asked for consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. The confirmed written consent; treatment plans and/or training programmes were tailored to each person's individual needs. All records were stored securely on the provider's computer system and access was restricted to authorised staff only.

The provider had taken steps to ensure the environment was suitably designed, secure and well maintained. There was enough suitable training and rehabilitation equipment available for people to use. Arrangements were in place to ensure equipment was routinely serviced and maintained. The premises and equipment were clean and there were arrangements in place for the collection of all waste.

Effective recruitment processes were followed when new staff were appointed to ensure they were suitable and qualified. All staff completed the provider's induction and mandatory training. This meant people could be confident that their needs were met by trained and qualified staff.

People's personal confidential information, staff records and other records relating to the management of the service were kept secure and up to date.

22 August 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us the service provided treatment following an assessment and screening process. Treatment was person centred and tailored to achieve their optimum level of fitness. One person said 'I know that with their support I'll be at my optimum fitness to compete.'

People told us they were involved in the decision making process and developed their training programme. People's privacy and dignity was respected.

People told us they received appointments quickly and flexible to meet their requirements. The service had access to a range of treatment facilities such a private consultation rooms.

People were supported by staff that had good access to training. Staff were able from time to time to obtain further relevant qualification as part of their continuous professional development and maintain their professional registration. One person said 'I think they're great, they definitely know what they're talking about and tailor the programme to suit me.'

People told us they had opportunities to make comment about the service. People were aware of how to express concerns or make a complaint about the service.

The provider had an effective quality assurance system, which monitored the day to day running of the service. People using the service had opportunities to comments and give their views about the quality of services experienced.