Updated 23 October 2025
Date of Assessment: 5 December 2025 to 17 December 2025. Woodlands Health Centre is a General Practitioner (GP) service and delivers service to around 14,000 people under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles show that the age profile of the service population differs from that of England nationally with a higher proportion of people aged over 65. There is a lower proportion of adults aged 20 to 45. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation in the service population group is in the 9th decile (9 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service population is relative to others. Most of the local population is White (95.54%), with 1.65% Asian, 0.57% Black, 1.83% mixed and 0.41% other. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working in and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
We carried out this assessment as more than 5 years had passed since the last inspection. We assessed all quality statements across all 5 key questions: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.
The service did not always have a positive learning culture, and not all staff felt able to raise concerns. Managers did not always investigate incidents thoroughly. Safe recruitment processes were not consistently followed and there was no regular supervision for clinical staff. The service did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. However, managers made sure mandatory training was up-to-date and appraisals were completed yearly, and people were safeguarded appropriately.
People were not always involved in assessments of their needs, care and treatment was not continuously monitored to improve outcomes. However, staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. The service worked well across the different staffing teams. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.
People were not always treated with kindness and compassion, and privacy and dignity were not always maintained. The service did not always demonstrate their commitment to the wellbeing of their staff. However, staff did treat people as individuals and supported their preferences and independence.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback; the service took it seriously and acted on it. Fair and equal care and treatment was provided. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care. However, the service was not always easy to access, and feedback from people who used the service reflected this.
Staff did not always feel they could speak up and that their voice would be heard. Not all leaders understood the context in which the service delivered care, treatment and support. They did not always embody the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. The service did not always follow their recruitment processes which were designed to value diversity in their workforce. Leaders lacked oversight of some processes in relation to governance and had not identified risks when those processes did not operate as intended. However, the service collaborated and worked in partnership with health and social care services to aid the transition between care providers.
We found breaches of regulation in relation to good governance. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.