• Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Drs Kumar, Nanu, Croft & Rana Also known as Dr Kumar & Partners

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Milman Road Health Centre (Ground Floor), Milman Road, Reading, Berkshire, RG2 0AR (0118) 987 1297

Provided and run by:
Drs Kumar, Nanu, Croft & Rana

All Inspections

6 October 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Drs Kumar, Nanu Croft and Rana on 6 October 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

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

  • The main practice had recently undergone extensive refurbishment to improve facilities in treatment and consulting rooms for patients.
  • Services were to be concentrated in the main practice with the branch practice due to close in November 2016. GP and nursing resources could then be focussed upon meeting the care needs of the registered population.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Most risks to patients were assessed and managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Information about how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
  • Information about services was available but not everybody would be able to understand or access it. For example, there were no information leaflets available in south Asian languages despite there being a large number of patients from south Asia on the practice list.
  • The practice did not demonstrate that audit was driving improvement in clinical outcomes. There was no audit strategy in place to meet the needs of the registered population.
  • Feedback from patients for some aspects of care was below national average.
  • There was a leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. However, leadership capacity was limited at the time of inspection by having two part time GP partners in post and reliance upon locum GP cover.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure the results and actions arising from clinical audit drive improvement in delivery of care and outcomes for patients. Ensure all relevant actions taken in response to national safety alerts are recorded as completed.
  • Ensure the needs of the local population are fully identified and understood to plan delivery of services that are responsive to their needs. For example, in provision of information in appropriate languages and formats and reviewing whether accepting relatives as translators for patients who have difficulty communicating in English is appropriate. Also in the provision of accessible services for patients with both hearing and physical disabilities.

In addition the provider should:

  • Review the practice processes to encourage more patients to attend national cancer screening programmes.
  • Ensure a system is in place to provide annual health checks for patients diagnosed with a learning disability.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice