Updated 25 February 2026
Date of Assessment: 8 July 2026 to 17 July 2026. Westside Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 12,031 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice population is 85% White, 8% Asian, 3% Black, 3% Other and 1% Mixed. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the seventh decile (7 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.
SAFE:
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 well-maintained and any risks mitigated. 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. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. However, we found a gaps in the oversight of staff files and patient records to be summarised increasing the risk that records may not be maintained accurately or kept up to date. The practice acknowledged these shortfalls and were able to give assurance that documentation was now present and risk assessments were in place.
EFFECTIVE:
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 took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.
CARING:
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 was working with staff for them to feel better supported in the workplace.
RESPONSIVE:
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.
WELL-LED:
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, and helped staff to develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, in an environment 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. Whilst we found most governance systems to be effective when we reviewed staff files, we found not all information was easily accessible for the management team to have clear oversight to ensure all checks had been undertaken in a timely manner. The practice was aware of the inconsistency in how the records were held as some documents were stored electronically and others in paper files and we saw they were addressing this. During the inspection process we also found a backlog in the summarisation of patient records, the provider was responsive and provided an action plan addressing the concerns. However, inconsistencies can limit the providers ability to maintain effective oversight.