The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Eaglescliffe Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Sunningdale Drive, Eaglescliffe, Stockton On Tees, Cleveland, TS16 9EA (01642) 780113

Provided and run by:
The Eaglescliffe Medical Practice

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 26 August 2025 to 28 August 2025. The Eaglescliffe Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers service to 12,961 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 94% of the practice population are white, 3% are Asian, and less than 1% are black, mixed race, or of another ethnicity. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 10th decile (10 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice 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 service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and were well-maintained. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. The service did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment and did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on 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 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. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their 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. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. 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.

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. Managers 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.

11/08/2015

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 11 August 2015. Overall the practice is rated as outstanding.

Please note that when referring to information throughout this report, for example any reference to the Quality and Outcomes Framework data, this relates to the most recent information available to the CQC at that time.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows.

Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. All opportunities for learning from internal and external incidents were maximised.

  • There is a holistic approach to assessing, planning and delivering care and treatment to patients who use the services. The practice used innovative and proactive methods to improve patient outcomes, working with other local providers to share best practice. For example the practice joined with a neighbouring practice to improve the care and treatment of patients in older peoples care homes they visited by producing standards of care and with measurable outcomes.
  • Staff actively engaged in activities to monitor and improve quality and outcomes. Opportunities to participate in benchmarking, peer review and accreditation are proactively pursued.
  • The continuing development of staff skills, competence and knowledge is recognised as integral to ensuring high-quality care.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and staff went the extra mile when patients required extra support. Information was provided to help patients understand the care available to them. The practice had produced detailed care plans for patients.
  • The practice worked closely with other organisations and with the local community in planning how services were provided to ensure that they were meeting the needs of their patients. The practice reviewed the Joint Strategic Needs Analysis (JSNA) and local census information to understand and plan services to meet the needs of their patients.
  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a consequence of feedback from patients and from the Patient Participation Group (PPG).
  • The systems to manage and share the information that is needed to deliver effective care are coordinated across services and support integrated care for people who use the services.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. The building was designed to meet the needs of patients. Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. A business plan was in place, was monitored and regularly reviewed and discussed with all staff. High standards were promoted and owned by all practice staff with evidence of team working across all roles.
  • There was a high level of constructive engagement with staff and a high level of staff satisfaction. Staff are proud of the organisation as a place to work and speak highly of the culture. Staff at all levels are actively encouraged to raise concerns and ideas.
  • There is a systematic approach taken to working with other organisations to improve care outcomes, tackle health inequalities and obtain best value.
  • The leadership drives continuous improvement and staff are accountable for delivering change. There is a clear practice approach to seeking out and embedding new ways of providing care and treatment.

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

  • The practice had a very good skill mix which included a nurse practitioner and was able to see a broader range of patients than the practice nurse. There was a preceptorship programme in place to support practice nurses employed in the practice.
  • The practice had produced detailed care plans for certain conditions such as those with mental illness, older people and other long term conditions. These plans advised clinicians on what they should be monitoring, questions they should ask patients about their condition and when they should refer patients to a consultant or acute care. We saw data that indicated the number of patients accessing mental health out patient’s services had decreased since the care plan had been put in place.
  • The practice used a screening tool to reduce polypharmacy and the prescribing of medicines that may cause side effects in older people. We saw that there was a reduction in admissions of older people to acute services from the previous year.
  • The practice, in collaboration with a neighbouring practice developed Clinical Standards for the care delivered in the care homes they visited. The standards set out what care the patient and staff in the homes should expect and how they would monitor their effectiveness.
  • The practice developed a range of templates and guidance for staff in the management of patients not included in Quality Outcome Framework (QOF). Examples of these were the care of patients suffering from coeliac disease, splenectomy and those patients taking novel oral anticoagulants. The templates also provide evidence based information on how these patients should be effectively supported.
  • The practice provided a dermatoscopy service. Two GPs had undertaken training to deliver this service. The practice continually reviewed and audited the process to improve in house referrals and the photographing of skin lesions as an accurate record into the patients notes.
  • The practice had developed a Memorandum of Understanding for mutual aid and this was updated in 2015. The document describes how the design of primary care estate can improve the resilience of GP provision when challenged. This was developed by the practice and seen as best practice and was adopted widely across practices in the North East and other strategic health authorities as part of the pandemic influenza preparedness plan during 2009/10.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice