You are here


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about West Heath Surgery on 9 September 2021. 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 West Heath Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

Review carried out on 7 June 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about West Heath Surgery on 7 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.

Inspection carried out on 13 December 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at West Heath Surgery on 13 December 2016. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

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

  • There was an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events and lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice.

  • The practice were proactive in taking action where safeguarding concerns were raised and discussing these with relevant family members and external stakeholders, for example social services and the Care Quality Commission.

  • Staff assessed needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.

  • Clinical audit was integrated within the practices’ governance system in order to evaluate the services and quality of care provided.

  • The practice identified patients who may be in need of extra support and signposted them to the relevant service.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • The practice had identified 44 patients as carers (0.7% of the practice list) and written information was available to direct carers to the various avenues of support available to them.

  • Patients could access appointments and services in a way and at a time that suited them. The practice offered extended hours for patients that could not attend during normal opening hours.

  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

  • The practice had a clear vision and strategy to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients.

  • The practice had a proactive approach to succession planning in the practice and was part of a project to create Kingsman College, which provided training for medical secretaries, practice management and phlebotomy.

  • Management were enthusiastic about upskilling and empowering staff members.

  • There was a clear leadership structure and a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.

  • There was an overarching governance framework which supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care.

  • Staff said they felt valued and supported and were encouraged to identify opportunities to improve the service delivered by the practice.

  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels and actively took part in local pilot schemes to improve outcomes for patients in the area.

  • GPs had direct access to book appointments for with a Care Navigator for patients whose needs identified they would benefit from this support.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had a proactive approach to succession planning in the practice and was part of a project to create Kingsman College. The college provided training for medical secretaries, practice management and phlebotomy and intended to extend training courses that were provided to include nurses, pharmacists and associate physicists.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Continue to identify if a patient is a carer and provide appropriate support and guidance, as relevant.

  • Continue to encourage patients to attend national screening programmes for bowel and breast cancer screening.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice