Updated 6 February 2026
Christchurch Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 15,500 people under a contract held with NHS England. The service is made up of 2 neighbouring sites, otherwise known as Orchard Practice and Barn Surgery. The service closed both of its branch surgeries, Burton Medical Centre and Bransgore Medical Centre. The service had since restructured its services including staffing and model of care to realign to the needs of the local community. In particular, using triage systems for access to services.
The National General Practice Profiles states demographics of people using the service are in line with local and national averages. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the service population group is in the 7th decile (7 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service 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. The assessment was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service died. This incident is subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken. As a result, this assessment did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, safeguarding people requiring a home visit and the subsequent coordination of care. This assessment examined those risks.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Leaders investigated incidents thoroughly. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were well-maintained and any risks had been mitigated. The service did not always assess or manage the risk of infection effectively. Although the service had oversight of risks and performance, systems and processes were not always effective to address shortfalls in relation to a backlog of documents for clinical follow-up or filing, causing potential delays in care and treatment planning. The service did not always make sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. They did not always make sure staff received effective support, supervision and development in line with national guidelines or service policy. The service did not ensure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. The service did not always have fully effective and embedded processes for monitoring people’s health in relation to asthma, safety alerts and some medicines prescribed which required monitoring. The service took action to address these issues following the assessment and provided evidence to demonstrate no harm had occurred.
Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity and supported people with their preferences on care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.
People were involved in decisions about their care. 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. 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. The service did not always ensure people could access care in a timely way via the telephone system. Average call waiting times and abandonment rates (percentage of callers who disconnect before reaching a call handler) consistently fell short of expected targets and national averages. This increased the risk of delays in accessing care and support.
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. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The service 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.
We identified 2 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.