During an assessment under our new approach
Date of Assessment: 20 June 2025 to 1 July 2025.
Scott Road Medical Centre is a GP practice which delivers service to 11367 (as of 1 June 2025) patients under a contract held with NHS England.
The National General Service Profiles state the ethnicity of the local population of the practice (as of 1 April 2023) consisted of 97.5% White, 0.9% Mixed, 0.8% Asian, 0.3% Black, and 0.5% Other. The age distribution of the service population is the same as the national average for older people (17%). For young people, it’s slightly above (20.9%) the national average (19.5%).
Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows the deprivation within the practice population group is in the sixth decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted on service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
We rated the key question of safe as requires improvement
Patients were not always protected and kept safe. Staff and patients could raise concerns, but the service did not always learn from safety events. The service did not always manage and mitigate risks appropriately. Staff did not always have the right skills and experience. Staff did not always assess risks to a patient’s health and safety or mitigate them where identified. The service did not always ensure staff received the appropriate level of supervision. The service did not safely manage medicines. However, the facilities and equipment of the service met the needs of staff and patients, and were clean and well-maintained, with any risks mitigated.
We rated the key question of effective as requires improvement.
The service did not always plan and deliver evidence-based care and treatment to patients. They did not always follow legislation and current evidence-based good service and standards. The service did not always make sure people’s care and treatment was effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health needs with them. However, the service made appropriate considerations about whether patients had capacity to make decisions, and they involved relevant people to help make decisions in the best interests of a patient where necessary. The service worked well across teams and services to support people and ensure key information about patients was available to professionals who needed to review it.
We rated the key question of caring as good.
Patients were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff treated patients as individuals and supported their preferences. Patients had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.
We rated the key question of responsive as good.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
We rated the key question of well-led as requires improvement.
The service did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes.Staff did not always feel their voice would be heard. There was not a culture of continuous improvement. However, leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The service worked well with the local community and other organisations to achieve positive outcomes for patients.
We found breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance.
In instances where the Care Quality Commission (CQC) has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded if the action has been taken forward. We have also asked the service for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.