The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Ailsworth Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

32 Main Street, Ailsworth, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, PE5 7AF (01733) 380686

Provided and run by:
Ailsworth Medical Centre

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Ailsworth Medical Centre 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 Ailsworth Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

01 november 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced, focussed follow up inspection at Ailsworth Medical Centre on 14th October 2021. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection on 25th June 2019, the practice was rated Good overall. We rated the practice as good for providing effective, caring, responsive and well led services and requires improvement for safe services. For all population groups we rated the practice as good apart from Families, children and young people which was rated as requires improvement.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out an announced, focussed follow up inspection at the practice to review in detail the actions taken by the provider to improve the quality of care. The focus of this inspection included:

  • The key questions of safe, effective and well led.
  • The follow up of the breach of regulation and areas where the provider ‘should’ improve, identified in our previous inspection.

The information we received and reviewed did not indicate the previous rating of good for providing caring and responsive services was affected and therefore we did not inspect these key questions and the ratings for providing caring and responsive services are carried over.

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:

  • Requesting evidence from the provider and reviewing this.
  • 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.
  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Gaining feedback from staff by using staff questionnaires.
  • Requesting and reviewing feedback from the Patient Participation Group.
  • Requesting and reviewing staff questionnaires.
  • 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 found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm. The practice had made and sustained the improvements required to address the concerns identified in our last inspection.
  • 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 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.
  • At our previous inspection, the practice had a lower performance in respect of the identification of carers. At this inspection, the practice demonstrated their improved approach to ensure that all carers were registered and their records coded. 153 patients (3.4%) of the patient population were now identified as carers.
  • We found the practice system and process to ensure all medicines were linked to a diagnosis or particular problem was not always wholly effective.
  • We found the practice system and process did not always ensure information for all patients with potential chronic kidney disease records was recorded.
  • The practice told us they were reviewing the quality of their care plans to ensure they were comprehensive and shared with the patients.
  • The practice had agreed plans to address any backlogs such as the reviews for patients with long term conditions.

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

  • Implement and monitor the action plan to address the backlog of long-term condition reviews.
  • Monitor the system to ensure patient records are correctly coded and that medicines are linked to diagnosis or problems within the clinical record.
  • Monitor and embed the systems and processes newly implemented to ensure all patients taking high-risk medicines are monitored appropriately.
  • Continue to improve the system to ensure patient care plans are documented and in a format that is useful to patients and other health professionals.
  • Continue to monitor and encourage patients/guardians to attend their appointments for baby immunisation and cervical screening.
  • Monitor and embed the systems and processes newly implemented to ensure all patients are monitored appropriately.

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

25 Jun to 25 Jun 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection at Ailsworth Medical Centre on 25 June 2019 to respond to concerns raised. The practice was previously inspected in April 2018 and rated as good in all domains and therefore good overall.

Our judgement of the quality of care at this service is based 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.

This means that:

  • Patients had good outcomes because they received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Patients were supported, treated with dignity and respect and were involved as partners in their care.
  • There were several examples of the caring nature of staff.
  • Outcomes from the GP Patient Survey in relation to the care provided by clinicians were generally in line with average.
  • People’s needs were met by the way in which services were organised and delivered.
  • Outcomes for patients in the Quality and Outcomes Framework for 2018/19 showed the practice had maintained a high level of achievement and had reduced their exception reporting.

We have rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:

  • The practice did not have evidence of safeguarding training for all staff.
  • We found that standard operating procedures were due for review in September 2018 and these had not been reviewed or updated.
  • Annual competencies for dispensary staff were not up to date.
  • We found there was a system for receiving and acting on safety alerts, however this was not always effective. We found one alert relating to sodium valproate that had been actioned appropriately and patients reviewed. However, we found another alert relating to antibiotics that had not been actioned.

We have rated the families, children and young people population group as requires improvement for effective services because:

  • Outcomes for childhood immunisations were below the national target.

We found the provider must:

  • Ensure care is provided in a safe way to patients.

We found the provider should:

  • Review and improve the new quality improvement system for auditing the services provided.
  • Improve the identification of carers to enable this group of patients to access the care and support they need.
  • Review standard operating procedures and policies to ensure these are updated appropriately.
  • Improve data relating to timely reviews for patients with a cancer diagnosis.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence table.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BS BM BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

21 March 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. At the previous Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection in March 2016, the practice received a good overall rating.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ailsworth Medical Practice on 21 March 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. The practice had a regular agenda item at meetings to discuss safety incidents.
  • The practice had systems in place to safeguard patients from abuse. The practice regularly reviewed all documentation for children who were not brought for appointments.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided through clinical audit. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence based guidelines.
  • The practice had achieved 100% performance for the Quality and Outcomes Framework.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity, and respect. Results from the national GP Patient Survey reflected this; all the results were above the CCG and national averages.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • The practice responded to complaints in a timely and open manner.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • There was a positive culture within the practice and staff reported the management team were supportive and approachable.
  • The practice worked across three sites with the main site at Ailsworth which was limited in the clinical and office space available. The practice told us that this compromised some of the services including GPs and nursing sessions they were able to offer. The practice was in discussion with the local planners to extend the building.
  • We found some inconsistencies in monitoring of quality and performance across the two sites we visited for example access to policies and procedures.
  • The practice told us they monitored quality and performance such as referrals by locum staff and filing of electronic mail but did not always record these.
  • The practice was in the process of recruiting additional staff; they had recognised that at times of staff absence some backlogs occurred.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review and strengthen the systems and processes to monitor quality and performance to ensure that performance of non-clinical tasks and the policies to support them are consistent across all three sites.
  • Review and formalise the risk assessment in relation to accepting telephone requests for medicines from patients.
  • Review the systems and process to ensure that all monitoring undertaken of quality and performance is formally recorded to enable trend analysis of any identified issues.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

21 March 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ailsworth Medical Centre on 21 March 2016. This was to check that the practice had taken sufficient action to address a number of significant shortfalls we had identified during our previous inspection in June 2015. Following this inspection in June 2015, the practice was rated as inadequate for providing safe and well-led services; as requires improvement for providing effective and responsive services; and good for providing caring services. Overall it was rated as inadequate. We also issued three warning notices and one requirement notice under the Health and Social Care Act 20018 and placed the practice in special measures as a result.

During this inspection, we found that the practice had taken sufficient action to address the breaches in regulations. For example, infection control procedures had improved significantly, staff training and appraisal had increased, complaints and significant events were analysed more closely, and governance systems were more robust. 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.
  • There was a robust programme of infection control audit in place which was facilitated by the infection control lead nurse.
  • 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 well and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

  • Given the small size of the practice, staff knew their patients well and offered a very personal service.

  • Palliative care was good, and those patients recently bereaved were well supported.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • 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.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements:

  • Review the use of CCTV cameras to ensure it meets guidance as set out in the Information Commissioner’s’ Office; In the picture: A data protection code of practice for surveillance cameras and personal information.

  • Review the repeat prescribing policy for patients.

  • Put formal systems in place to ensure all clinicians are kept up to date with national guidance and guidelines

I confirm that this practice has improved sufficiently to be rated ‘Good’ overall. The practice will be removed from special measures.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

21/11/2015 and 22/11/2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This inspection took place so that we could follow up enforcement action that we had taken after our comprehensive inspection on 15 June 2015. The inspection report at that time rated the practice as inadequate overall and the practice were placed into special measures. You can find the report for the comprehensive inspection on the CQC website (www.cqc.org.uk). Following the comprehensive inspection we issued a warning notice to the practice because there was immediate risks to patients that required urgent attention by the practice in relation to staffing and good governance. This was in breach of Regulations 17(1)(2)(a)(b)(d)(i)(ii) and 18(2)(a) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

We returned on 21 and 22 October 2015 to ensure the practice had taken action to mitigate these risks and complied with the regulations.

We found the provider had made appropriate improvements in ensuring that suitable arrangements were in place to improve systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service and ensure that staff received sufficient training and support. We found that;

  • Systems were in place to manage fire safety, the safety of the premises and equipment. A risk management log was in place to help improve monitoring procedures.
  • Information governance systems had improved and action had been taken to secure the management of information. For example all staff had received information governance training.
  • Evidence of recruitment checks had improved and staff who had received disclosure and barring service checks (DBS) from a previous employer, had reapplied for a check as an employee of Ailsworth Medical Centre.
  • Staff training, support and annual appraisal systems had been improved so that staff had completed training, or were aware of the mandatory and personal development training that they were being supported to complete.
  • Governance systems had been strengthened and provided evidence to demonstrate that quality improvements were being identified and actioned to promote improvement.

We found the provider should also;

  • Review the practice’s recruitment policy to include guidelines on using portable DBS checks.
  • Take action to ensure that medicines are stored securely at the Newborough practice.
  • Ensure that copies of training certificates are sought for their own records of assurance

The practice continues to operate within the special measures applied by the CQC and will continue to do so for a total of six months from the publication of the report. After this time, CQC will revisit and re-inspect Ailsworth Medical Centre and will amend our judgements and ratings in accordance with our findings at that time.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

17 September 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

At our inspection on 17 September 2015, we followed up enforcement action that we had taken following our comprehensive inspection on 15 June 2015. The inspection report for the comprehensive inspection can be found on the CQC website. Following the comprehensive inspection we issued a warning notice to the practice because there was immediate risks to patients that required urgent attention by the practice in relation to infection control procedures. This was in breach of Regulation 12(1)(2)(h) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We returned on 17 September 2015 to ensure the practice had taken action to mitigate these risks and complied with the regulation.

We found the provider had made appropriate improvements in ensuring that suitable arrangements were in place to assess, prevent and control the risks of infection. We found that;

  • A member of staff had been delegated the lead responsibility for infection control
  • A programme of infection control audits had been completed and an annual plan was in place.
  • There were adequate systems in place to seek assurance that the premises, including clinical equipment, were being regularly cleaned to a satisfactory standard
  • Infection prevention and control had been given a higher priority within the practice. An infection control group met regularly and there were clearer systems in place to communicate issues and share information with the staff team.
  • We observed improved management of clinical waste and sharps.

The practice continues to operate within the special measures applied by the CQC and will continue to do so for six months. After this time, CQC will revisit and re-inspect Ailsworth Medical Centre and will amend our judgements and ratings.

15 June 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ailsworth Medical Centre on 15 June 2015. Overall the practice is rated as inadequate.

Specifically, we found the practice to be inadequate for providing safe and well led services. We found that the practice required improvement for effective and responsive services. The practice was good for providing caring services. It was overall, inadequate for providing services for older people, people with long-term conditions, families children and young people, working age people (including those recently retired) and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded and reviewed although this was not always in depth so that learning could be maximised.
  • Risks associated with the safe running of the service were not always assessed or well managed such as infection prevention and control measures and health and safety risks.
  • Data showed patient outcomes were average for the locality. Few audits had been carried out and we saw no evidence that audits were driving improvement in performance to improve patient outcomes.
  • 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 but required a review so that patients were enabled to raise concerns or complaints in any format.
  • Urgent appointments were usually available on the day they were requested. Most patients said that they had access to an appointment when they needed one.
  • The practice had some policies and procedures to govern activity, but some of these did not contain key information to guide staff and required a review. The practice did not have an established process to communicate and review governance issues to ensure that actions were continually reviewed.
  • The practice sought feedback from a patient participation group. Other methods of seeking feedback from staff and patients could be improved.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Improve the arrangements for the security and storage of blank prescription forms.
  • Improve the safety of medicines by; completing a risk assessment for the security of medicines, introducing a policy to ensure medicines are stored at the required temperature and introducing formal checks on the management of high risk medicines.
  • Ensure the recruitment process follows the policy and that the appropriate records are maintained for all staff.
  • Review the systems in place for assessing the risk of, and preventing, detecting and controlling the spread of infections.
  • Ensure that staff receive appropriate training and a performance appraisal so that they can carry out the duties they are employed to perform.
  • Ensure there are effective systems or processes in place to access, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services provided. This should include reviewing formal governance arrangements, policies and procedures, systems for information governance, equipment checks and health and safety risk management.

In addition the provider should:

  • Ensure there is a clinical audit plan in place that includes completed clinical audit cycles.
  • Ensure that new clinical practice guidelines are routinely discussed in practice meetings. 
  • Ensure that records of multidisciplinary working are completed. Records of significant events and complaints should provide sufficient detail to ensure that learning is maximised and actions are completed.
  • Review the staffing skill mix to ensure that suitably qualified and skilled staff are available to meet patients’ needs.
  • Review the toilet facilities to ensure they are accessible for patients with a disability
  • Ensure staff are confident in using the electronic alerts to identify patients with particular needs such as a disability.
  • Inform patients and visitor to the practice that CCTV cameras are in operation.
  • Improve the complaints process so that verbal concerns and complaints are monitored and any actions taken as a result of the complaint are followed up. Ensure that patients are aware that they can raise concerns and complaints in any format.

On the basis of the ratings given to this practice at this inspection (and the concerns identified at the previous inspection in September 2014), I am placing the provider into special measures. This will be for a period of six months. We will inspect the practice again in six months to consider whether sufficient improvements have been made. If we find that the provider is still providing inadequate care we will take steps to cancel its registration with CQC.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

Ailsworth Medical Centre has a practice population of approximately 2300 patients.

During the inspection we looked to see how the practice met the needs of six specific population groups. The groups are; older people; people with long term conditions; mothers babies and young people; the working age population and those recently retired; people in vulnerable circumstances who may have poor access to care and people experiencing poor mental health. The practice was meeting the needs of patients in these groups.

We found that the practice had recently employed a part time practice manager. Prior to this the practice had only employed a practice manager for a limited period of time. As a result, they had not established a clear and robust management structure and were aware that many of their procedures required improvement. We found that improvements were needed to manage complaints, significant events and safety alerts. The methods used to manage risks in relation to fire, infection control and staff recruitment also required a review.

Patients we spoke with and the comments cards we received demonstrated a high level of patient satisfaction with the service they received at Ailsworth Medical Centre. There was an active patient participation group who had a positive relationship with the practice team, and felt able to contribute their views on behalf of the patient population.

The practice was able to respond to appointment requests to ensure patients were seen by their preferred GP within a few days. Within the last two years the practice had increased the number of GPs and invested in some professional development for a newly appointed practice nurse. However, clinical responsibilities were unclear and the processes used to monitor clinical effectiveness required development, for example through a clear clinical audit programme.