Dr KP Patel's Practice Also known as Wallasey Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We looked for evidence service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 71 (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 had a small and manageable list of registered patients and was situated in an affluent area of London. There was a small team of staff with a shared vision, strategy and culture. Staff and leaders understood the challenges and the needs of people, and their communities and staff had received equality and diversity training.

There was a mission statement displayed at reception and staff we interviewed were clear on the organisations core purpose.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The service generally had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities and they were clear on how to access all required policies and procedures. Leaders proactively supported staff and regularly met with them to complete appraisals and performance reviews. Staff took confidentiality and information security seriously and they had completed training in this regard.

However, we identified some areas of governance that required attention. For example:

Governance processes did not include risk assessments for non-clinical staff in the absence of criminal record checks.

Governance processes did not set out the frequency of mandatory training requirements to ensure staff competence.

A number of policies required review as they were not always tailored to the practice and there was insufficient evidence of regular staff meetings between July 2025 and April 2026.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.