The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Hollies Medical Practice

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Tamworth Health Centre, Upper Gungate, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 7EA (01827) 217799

Provided and run by:
The Hollies Medical Practice

Important:

We served a warning notice on The Hollies Medical Practice on 13 November 2025 for failing to meet the Regulations 12 and 17 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 11 August 2025 to 28 August 2025. The Hollies Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers service to 15,323 under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnicity of the practice population is, 95.49% White, 1.94% Mixed,1.48% Asian, 0.70% Black and 0.39% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 6th 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 service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

The service did not consistently identify, manage, or mitigate risks within the care environment. We noted concerns regarding infection prevention and control. Medicines and treatments were not always managed safely or tailored to individual needs, abilities, and preferences.The service demonstrated a positive learning culture where people could raise concerns. Staffing levels were sufficient, with personnel possessing appropriate skills, qualifications, and experience.

The practice did not consistently comply with relevant legislation or align with current evidence-based standards. In some cases, systems were lacking to ensure people received effective care and treatment.People were actively involved in assessing their own needs. Staff reviewed assessments considering individuals’ communication, personal, and health requirements. Staff collaborated with all agencies involved in care to achieve the best outcomes and ensure smooth transitions between services.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

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.

Governance systems were not always effective in identifying and migrating risk. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment.

We found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. We have taken action in response to these breaches in the form of serving warning notices to the provider.

11 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Hollies Medical Centre on 11 January 2016. Overall the practice is rated as Good.

Please note that when referring to information throughout this report, for example any reference to the Quality and Outcomes Framework data, this relates to the most recent information available to the CQC at that time.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • Patients said they were treated with 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.
  • Patients told us they could get an appointment when they needed one. Urgent appointments were available the same day.
  • 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, patients and third party organisations, which it acted on.

  • The practice achieved a 100% score for the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) in 2014/15 and exception rates could be explained.

  • There was a high level of clinical governance evidenced through a constructive engagement with staff, a failsafe patient recall system and proactively reviewed performance management arrangements.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice