Prospect Medical Group

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains good.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care and wellbeing with them. We saw good evidence of reviews of patients who had asthma. However, asthma patients who had been prescribed more than 12 short-acting reliever inhalers in the previous 12 months had not been invited for review of their asthma control, with the aim of improving their asthma through education and change of treatment if required.There were 25 patients out of 379 with hypothyroidism who had not received a thyroid function test monitoring for 18 months. We looked at 5 patients in detail and saw that 4 patients were issued medication beyond review dates with no health checks made. Following our assessment the practice told us they had proactively contacted patients to put the required checks in place. However, we looked at the monitoring of 5 patients in details with chronic kidney disease and found no issues with monitoring of this type of medication.

The service mostly made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs.

Some of the results from our clinical searches showed that improvements could be made to the recall system.

Feedback from people using the service was mostly positive apart from the GP National Survey where results were below the national average. Other feedback from NHS friends and family test and feedback to CQC showed patients felt involved in assessments of their needs and staff understood their individual and cultural needs.

There was a high percentage of the practice population whose first language was not English. Reception staff were aware of this and arranged for a translator to be present if necessary and a longer appointment if needed.

At our previous inspection we said the practice should develop a more proactive and structured approach to identifying topics for clinical audit. At this assessment they provided us with some audits they had carried out to improve care. Ideally, a clinical audit is a continuous cycle that is continuously measured with improvements made after each cycle. The practice provided us with audits of cervical screening and continuous glucose monitoring for diabetic patients. These were single cycle reviews.

The practice had initiated a project with administrative staff to make task management more appropriate and efficient. This resulted in more efficient management of tasks and a reduction in workload.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services.

The practice had a buddy system in place for GPs to cover each other for leave or sickness, administrative staff would monitor this to ensure results were picked up.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to patients’ health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. They could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

Some of the data from outcomes at the practice were below national or expected figures.

We discussed this with the staff who told us the demographics at the practice were challenging. There was a history of poor engagement with the ethnic minority.

patients at the practice and high numbers of patients who did not attend appointments.

The latest verified data held from 2023 showed the % of persons eligible for cervical cancer screening who were screened adequately was 51.3% compared to expected uptake of 80%.

The practice had carried out an audit of cervical screening to see how they could improve the numbers attending for screening. They set up a drop-in clinic and they carried out more texts to patients to encourage them to attend.

The local Primary Care Network (PCN) provided the practice with the latest cervical screening figures, covering the period up to the end of January 2025 – 100% for age 50-64 and 93.92% for ages 25-49. Source of data unknown, this was unvalidated and unverified data.

The 4 indicators for childhood immunisations we held from 2023 were all below the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended coverage of 95%. For example, the percentage of children aged 5 who have received immunisation for measles, mumps and rubella (two doses of MMR) was 81.6%. Staff told us they had several ‘ghost’ patients who were abroad and therefore not able to attend for immunisations. There were cultural challenges from some of the patients regarding immunisation. They had carried out work to improve the numbers of attendees. This included working with ‘The Deep End Project’ which aimed to help practices in the most deprived areas of the country. The nurses would carry out home visits and drop-in sessions to ensure vaccinations were carried out and the practice had a strict follow-up policy.

The practice provided us with unvalidated and unverified data for the current year (source unknown) that the % of children who had received two doses of MMR was 73.1%.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation.