- GP practice
Plumstead Health Centre PMS
We served a Warning Notice on Plumstead Health Centre PMS on 7 August 2026 for failing to meet the regulations relating to safe care and treatment and their GP practice.
Assessment report published 13 August 2026
Contents
On this page
- Overview
- Shared direction and culture
- Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
- Freedom to speak up
- Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
- Governance, management and sustainability
- Partnerships and communities
- Learning, improvement and innovation
Well-led
We looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture
At our last assessment, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good.
This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.
The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.
Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
Staff told us they felt valued and supported by leaders in the practice. Reasonable adjustments had been made for patients with protected characteristics. Staff with caring responsibilities were supported to make adjustments to working patterns. Leaders were knowledgeable and capable and led with integrity, openness and honesty.
We found leaders had addressed many of the concerns we found at our last assessment in September 2025. However, we found some areas of concern had not been adequately addressed including the management of medicines safety alerts, medication reviews and the identification of patients with previously undiagnosed conditions.
Freedom to speak up
The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.
Staff were aware of how to raise concerns. The Freedom to Speak up arrangements had recently been put into place so there were no examples of staff using them.Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.
Governance, management and sustainability
We found some improvements to the provider’s governance processes since our last assessment in September 2025. However, we found that the provider’s own systems and processes had failed to identify that improvements were required to deliver safe and effective patient care, including medicines safety alerts, medication reviews and the identification of patients with previously undiagnosed conditions.
Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. Managers clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously.
Partnerships and communities
We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.
Learning, improvement and innovation
The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.
The practice had a quality improvement plan in place to help drive improvements in services. This focussed on improving patient satisfaction through improved access to the service and improved customer service. All staff were encouraged to put forward and test out new ways of working.
Staff feedback was used to drive improvement. For example, staff raised concerns about the volume of calls the practice received and the impact of this on staff and patients. Leaders made changes to the telephone system and continue to monitor telephone access. This has contributed to improved patient satisfaction regarding telephone access. Concerns raised by patients regarding appointment availability has resulted in changes to appointment slots to enable the practice to offer a greater variety of appointments.