The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Weoley Park Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

112 Weoley Park Road, Selly Oak, Birmingham, West Midlands, B29 5HA (0121) 472 1965

Provided and run by:
Weoley Park Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Weoley Park Surgery on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Weoley Park Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

25 July 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at Weoley Park Surgery between the 20 July 2022 and 25 July 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

The ratings for each key question are as follows:

Safe - Good

Effective – Good

Caring – Good

Responsive – Good

Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection on 6 September 2016, the practice was rated Good overall and for all key questions.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Weoley Park Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection as part of our band one pilot inspections of practices previously rated good or outstanding. This was to pilot the changes to how CQC are monitoring services in response to the pandemic.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A short site visit

Our findings

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

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Safeguarding arrangements had been developed to help support and protect the practice’s most vulnerable patients.
  • We found the premises was well maintained and both the main and branch surgery had undergone recent refurbishment.
  • Infection prevention and control measures were in place to minimise the risks to patients.
  • Our clinical searches found medicines were well managed.
  • The practice learned from incidents and complaints and had implemented systems for minimising the risk of reoccurrence.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Our review of clinical records found patients with long-term conditions received appropriate management and follow-up.
  • However, there was low uptake of some child immunisations and cervical screening.
  • The practice had a strong culture of learning and development of staff to meet the needs of their patient population.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Implement systems for recording ongoing checks of clinical staff registration with their professional bodies to ensure they are kept up to date.
  • Implement systems for recording weekly fire alarm testing to confirm it has been done.
  • Record the issuing of steroid cards, where appropriate.
  • Risk assess the non-wipeable chair in the isolation room, and take action as appropriate.
  • Strengthen systems to encourage attendance from patients who regularly do not attend for their long term condition or medicine reviews, in particular those with more complex care needs.
  • Improve childhood immunisation and cervical screening uptake.

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

6 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Weoley Park Surgery on 6 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 an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

  • 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.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

  • 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.

  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.

  • The practice had appropriate 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 had an active patient participation group which influenced practice development.

  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels.

  • The practice team was forward thinking and part of local pilot schemes to improve outcomes for patients in the area.

  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

    We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • There was a highly active, motivated and engaged patient participation group (PPG) in place which met regularly every six to eight weeks. The PPG had repeatedly engaged with patients which included carrying out detailed and comprehensive surveys. There were many examples of where the PPG had engaged with the practice and contributed to positive improvements within the previous 12 months, including helping to design the practice premises from a patient perspective, designing and maintaining the practice website with the aim of making it easier to use and navigate for patients, and working with the practice to set up an on-site programme of regular sessions run by external organisations to support patients.

However, there was an area of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • The practice should take steps to increase the number of health checks carried out for patients registered as having a learning disability.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice