The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr. Wilks & Partners

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Wheeler Lane, Witley, Godalming, Surrey, GU8 5QR (01428) 682218

Provided and run by:
The Witley and Milford Medical Partnership

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr. Wilks & Partners 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 Dr. Wilks & Partners, you can give feedback on this service.

15 May 2019

During a routine inspection

We had previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr. Wilks & Partners (also known as Witley & Milford Medical Partnership) in May 2018. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The practice was rated as requires improvement in safe and effective, good in responsive and well-led, and outstanding in caring. The full comprehensive report on the May 2018 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr. Wilks & Partners on our website www.cqc.org.uk

At the May 2018 inspection we found that the provider had not:

  • Ensured care and treatment was provided in a safe way to patients. In particular risk assessments and action plans in relation to Legionella, fire and health and safety.
  • Ensured the management of medicines kept patients safe. In particular, in relation to the security of blank prescription stationery for use in computers, controlled drugs and emergency medicines.
  • Ensured staff employed in the provision of regulated activities had received the appropriate training and professional development necessary to enable them to carry out their duties.

There were also areas where the provider should make improvements by:

  • Reviewing their complaints procedure so that the information within this complies with the NHS complaints procedure.

We carried out an announced inspection at Witley & Milford Medical Partnership on 15 May 2019. This was to confirm the practice had carried out their plan to make the improvements required as identified at our previous inspection on 24 May 2018. We found that the practice had addressed all of the concerns previous found and was now compliant in all areas.

We have rated this practice as good overall and in all of the key questions. They have been rated as good overall for all population groups.

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 rated the practice good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led care because:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • Staff worked well together as a team and all felt supported to carry out their roles. There was a strong team ethos and culture of working together for a common aim.

We saw one area of outstanding practice: -

  • The practice had installed an online general practitioner consultation platform ‘AskMyGP’. This meant that patients could contact the practice at any time of the day and request a video chat, a telephone appointment, a face to face appointment or an e-mail reply. If patients used this service during the working day all patients would be replied to in that day. If it was during out of hours the practice guaranteed a response the next working day. Requests would be reviewed and the appropriate response given. For example, GPs could decide that a face to face appointment would be more appropriate – which could be booked for the patient there and then. The practice was able to show us data which evidenced that over an eight-week period the practice had received 6,099 requests and that the average time to respond took 71 minutes. We were also able to see data that this had reduced the amount of patients calling for an appointment, had improved the time GPs could spend with patients and improved patient satisfaction.

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

  • Review the medicines policy to ensure all medicines not appropriate for a nomad tray are listed.

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

24 May 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as requires improvement overall. (Previous inspection 02/2016 – Rating Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

Are services effective? – Requires Improvement

Are services caring? – Outstanding

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced inspection at The Witley and Milford Medical Partnership on 24 May 2018. The inspection was part of our planned inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. However, when incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • There was an active patient participation group in place who told us that they had seen improvements within the practice.
  • Patient survey results were extremely positive and higher than the clinical commissioning group (CCG) average in all questions.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • However :-
  • Risks to patients were not always assessed and well managed. For example in relation to health and safety, Legionella and medicines management.
  • The practice was unable to demonstrate that staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment. For example, information supplied by the practice detailed not all staff had received training areas such as mental capacity training or the principles of health and safety.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice ran a charity that provided funding to supply a night sitting service for palliative care patients in the area of Waverley. This enabled carers to get rest and provided comfort for the patients.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients. In particular risk assessments and action plans in relation to Legionella, fire and health and safety.
  • Ensure the management of medicines keeps patients safe. In particular, in relation to the security of blank prescription stationery for use in computers, controlled drugs and emergency medicines.
  • Ensure staff employed in the provision of regulated activities receive the appropriate training and professional development necessary to enable them to carry out their duties.

The area where the provider should make improvements:

  • Take action to review their complaints procedure so that the information within this complies with the NHS complaints procedure.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

17 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Witley Surgery on 17 February 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 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.
  • Feedback from patients was consistently and strongly positive and patients said how caring the practice was.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day. Results from the national GP patient survey showed that patient’s satisfaction with how they could access care and treatment was better than local and national averages.
  • 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.

We saw two areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had recognised a problem with the services for night sitting for palliative care patients and had set up a charity which raised funds to provide night sitting services. This made a significant difference to palliative care patients.

  • The practice had a dedicated GP focussing on frail patients and avoiding hospital admission.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Improve accessibility of the patient toilet by fitting a support rail and emergency pull cord.

  • Review the practice training policy and ensure there is a means for staff to keep up to date with training if they are unable to attend an in house training session

  • Consider arranging for an external audit of controlled drugs in the dispensary to provide reassurance of the control required for storage of these medicines.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice