The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

St James Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Coal Orchard, Taunton, Somerset, TA1 1JP (01823) 285400

Provided and run by:
St James 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 St James 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 St James Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

8 May to 9 May 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection November 2014 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services effective? – 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 focused inspection at St James Medical Centre and Orchard Medical Centre (the branch surgery) on 8 and 9 May 2019. We decided to undertake an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us. This inspection looked at the key questions effective and well led.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • The practice encouraged involvement in care and treatment decision making. For example, through treatment escalation plans and identification of carers.
  • The practice prioritised and worked proactively in ensuring services were delivered in ways that would improve patient outcomes. Services were proactively planned to meet a diverse range of patient need. We saw improvements in care for patients as a result of ongoing monitoring, quality improvement work, and provision of additional services such as a dermatology clinic when the local service closed.
  • The practice used information technology to improve patient access to care and treatment such as a text recall service and Engage Consult. Patients reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • There was a strong focus on creating a culture of education, continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

4 November 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

St James Medical Centre is a town centre practice providing primary care services to patients resident in Taunton. The practice has a patient population of approximately 13399.

We undertook a comprehensive announced inspection on 4 November 2014. Our inspection team was led by a Care Quality Commission (CQC) Lead Inspector and GP specialist advisor.

Before visiting, we reviewed a range of information we held about the practice and asked other organisations to share what they knew. This included the Somerset Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), NHS England and Healthwatch.

The overall rating for the service was good. Our key findings were as follows:

  • Patients were able to get an appointment when they needed it.
  • Staff were caring and treated patients with kindness and respect.
  • Staff explained and involved patients in treatment decisions
  • Patients were cared for in an environment which was clean and reflected good infection control practices.
  • Patients were protected from the risks of unsafe medicine management procedures.
  • The practice had the appropriate equipment, medicines and procedures to manage foreseeable patient emergencies.
  • The practice met nationally recognised quality standards for improving patient care and maintaining quality.
  • The practice had systems to identify, monitor and evaluate risks to patients.
  • Patients were treated by suitably qualified staff.
  • GPs and nursing staff followed national guidance in the care and treatment provided.

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

  • The practice also participated in schemes which promoted self-care for good health such as the diabetes education programme (DESMOND) and the use of telehealth systems.

However, there was an area of practice where the provider needs to make improvement.

The provider should:

  • Ensure there are systematic processes in place to share learning from significant events and disseminate this amongst the all staff.
  • Instigate a process to facilitate clinical audit cycles so that they are undertaken as a planned programme.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice