Sheepcot Medical Centre

Updated 26 February 2025

Date of Assessment: 16 December 2024 to 17 December 2024. Sheepcot Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 10,747 people under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states of the people registered, 74% are White, 15% are Asian, 5.7% are Black, 4% are mixed and 2% are another ethnicity. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the eighth decile (8 out of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report. Our assessment found the service did not always have a good learning culture and people could not always raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents, although processes for monitoring incidents were not always effective. People were not always protected and kept safe. Staff understood risk, however, processes for managing risk required strengthening. The facilities and equipment did not always meet the needs of people, and infection prevention and control processes were not effective. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications, and experience, however, managers did not ensure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Medicines monitoring was not always effective and stronger governance processes were required for safe care. We are placing this service in special measures for 6 months. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

Updated 26 February 2025

People were not always involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal, and health needs. Care was not always based on the 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 considered people who were involved in care when making decisions in people’s best interests. People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People did not always have choices in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.People were not always involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback, however, they were not always confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was not always easy to access. The practice worked to eliminate discrimination. People did not always feel that they received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were not always involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care. Leaders and staff did not always demonstrate a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. 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 lack of governance processes that impacted culture improvement.