The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Queslett Medical Centre Also known as Queslett Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

522 Queslett Road, Great Barr, Birmingham, West Midlands, B43 7DY (0121) 360 8560

Provided and run by:
Queslett Medical Centre

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 3 June 2026. Queslett Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 1,695 people under a contract held with NHS England. According to the latest available data, the ethnic make-up of the service area is approximately 76% White,13% Asian, 3% Mixed, 5% Black and 2% Other. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation within the service population group is in the 6th decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service population is relative to others.

This was a focused assessment. We undertook this assessment due to the length of time since our last assessment. We assessed 10 quality statements from across all 5 key questions. 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.

Staff kept facilities clean and maintained equipment appropriately to ensure people were kept safe. They assessed and managed the risk of infection well and took steps to control the risk of it spreading. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Staff supported people to live healthier lives, monitoring their care and treatment to ensure they received positive and consistent outcomes. Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity. People could access care, treatment and support when they needed it. Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage groups of people who used the service and sought ways to address any barriers. The service had a clear vision and strategy, which considered the needs of the people who used their service and the wider community. Staff understood their individual roles and responsibilities. Leaders accounted for the actions, behaviours and performance of staff through clear governance processes. However, we identified some shortfalls in relation to safe staff recruitment processes, infection, prevention and control and safe environment. The provider took immediate action to address the shortfalls.

11 May 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Queslett Medical Centre on 19 September 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the September 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Queslett Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced desk-based review carried out on 11 May 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 19 September 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice continues to be rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice operated effective systems for reporting and recording significant events. Significant event logs showed that the practice had responded and learned from safety incidents.
  • Effective systems were in place to receive, act on and disseminate alerts from the Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). Members of the management team provided documentation which showed that appropriate actions had been taken and outcomes shared within the practice.

  • When we carried out our September 2016 comprehensive inspection data we viewed showed that the practice uptake for national screening programmes such as bowel and breast cancer was below local and national average. As part of this desk-based review members of the management team we spoke with explained that the practice continued working closely with the health promotion team to encourage uptake. For example, we were told that staff actively monitored attendance and actively contacted patients who failed to attend their screening appointments. The practice provided evidence of posters which they placed in the reception area advising patients of future screening dates.

  • The practice provided unverified data from 2015/17 screening round which showed that 32 patients were invited for breast screening, 45% attended; 47% were allocated a second appointment and 13% opted out.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

19 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Queslett Medical Centre on 19 September 2016. 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. However, incident records did not demonstrate where learning opportunities had been maximised.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • The practice provided strong evidence of their approach to safeguarding, including proactive training, active identification and management of issues such as domestic abuse and Female Genital Mutilation.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey published in July 2016 showed that the practice was above average for its satisfaction scores on consultations with GPs and how they could access care and treatment. Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment when they needed one, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • 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 and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

  • There was an overarching governance framework, which supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care. In most areas, the governance structures and procedures reflected best practice. However, there were areas where the arrangements were not as thorough. For example, the practice did not establish an effective system which evidenced appropriate actions taken following the receipt of safety alerts.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Establish a systematic approach when acting on patient safety alerts such as Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Review the incident reporting process to ensure learning outcomes are maximised.

  • Continue to consider ways of encouraging the uptake of national screening programmes such as cervical, bowel and breast cancer.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice