• Doctor
  • GP practice

Quarry Bank Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

165 High Street, Quarry Bank, Brierley Hill, West Midlands, DY5 2AE (01384) 566651

Provided and run by:
Dr Kiranmayi Penumka

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 16 April 2026 to 28 April 2026. Quarry Bank Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 4512 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 85.87% of patients are White, 8.36% Asian, 1.82% Black, 2.76% Mixed and 1.19% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 4th decile (4 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 a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly and processes were in place to ensure learning was shared with all the team to mitigate future risks. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. Effective processes for the recruitment of staff were in place to ensure all the appropriate checks had been completed prior to commencing employment. 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 medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.

EFFECTIVE: People were involved in assessments of their needs. 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. Staff involved those important to people took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

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: 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. Feedback from patients was mixed about accessing the services provided and this was also reflected in the results of the GP National Patient Survey. 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: 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. There were effective governance processes and systems in place to identify, manage and mitigate risks. 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.

During an assessment under our new approach

We carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive at Quarry Bank Medical Centre on the 20 March 2024. Overall, the practice is rated as good and the key question ‘Is the service Responsive’ continues to be rated as providing a good service. We carried out the assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet people’s demands for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers. We recognise the work that GP practices have been engaged in to continue to provide safe, quality care to the people they serve. We know staff are carrying this out whilst the demand for general practice remains exceptionally high, with more appointments being provided than ever. However, in this challenging context, access to general practice remains a concern for people. Our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. The assessment of the quality statement equity of access includes looking at what practices are doing innovatively to improve patient access to primary care and sharing this information to drive improvement. At this assessment we found: People could access services when they need to, without physical or digital barriers, including out of normal hours and in an emergency. Physical premises and equipment were accessible. People were given support to overcome barriers to ensure equal access. The leaders understood the challenges to patient access, and this was demonstrated in their action plan. They responded flexibly to meet people’s needs, such as the ways in which people could access care and treatment, as well as the types of appointments being made available.

27 June 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Quarry Bank Medical Centre on 27 June 2019. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

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 good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • There were clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • The practice worked proactively with other organisations to ensure patients had access to a range of services to support their health and wellbeing.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Patient feedback through comment cards, reviews on NHS Choices and patient consultations on the day of the inspection were positive about the caring nature of the practice.
  • The practice had proactively identified and supported 165 carers, approximately 4% of the practice population. Patients identified as carers were eligible for a number of services such as flu vaccinations, and referrals for further support.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review the stock of emergency medicines to ensure they are appropriate to cover potential emergency situations.

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