• Doctor
  • GP practice

Stanley Health Centre Also known as Stanley Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lake Lock Road, Stanley, Wakefield, West Yorkshire, WF3 4HS (01924) 822328

Provided and run by:
Stanley Health 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 Stanley Health 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 Stanley Health Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

4 June 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Stanley Health Centre on 4 June 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

23 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Stanley Health Centre on 23 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.
  • 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 areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice delivered an avoiding unplanned admissions service which provided proactive care management for those patients who had complex needs and were at risk of an unplanned hospital admission. The practice used a risk profiling tool to identify these patients. The practice then carried out advanced care planning and regular patient reviews, which involved multi-disciplinary working across health and social care. As a result the practice could evidence a 46.8% reduction in emergency admissions over the past two years.

  • The practice provided two clinical sessions per week at local nursing homes, during which patient health needs were met and care plans were reviewed. As a result of their interventions the practice could evidence that from October 2014 to September 2015 there had been a 12.5% reduction in Accident and Emergency attendances, an 11.3% reduction in admissions and a 10.4% reduction in ambulance calls for patients from this home.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

28 October 2013

During a routine inspection

Patients expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. Patients were given information and support regarding their treatment options.

Five patients we spoke with were happy with the care and treatment they received. One patient said; 'The doctors listen to what you want.'

Another patient told us; 'I can get appointments. The staff are friendly.'

Two patients told us they had regular reviews of their care and treatment, when they required.

The practice had clear information about how to safeguard children and vulnerable adults. The five members of staff we spoke with were aware of what to do if they suspected abuse was happening.

The practice had a recruitment policy. However, this required further detail to be added regarding the job application process, including how references should be obtained and recorded. We saw staff had job descriptions which made clear their role and responsibilities.

Four of the five patients we spoke with knew what to do if they wished to make a complaint. The five members of staff we spoke with informed us they were aware of the steps to take if a complaint was made directly to them. The practice had a complaints policy in place. However, this required amending to accurately reflect the NHS complaint process.