- GP practice
Great Oakley Medical Centre
Assessment report published 15 April 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 9 to 11 March 2026.
Great Oakley Medical Centre is a GP practice situated at:
1 Barth Close,
Corby, NN18 8LU.
The practice delivers service to approximately 15,600 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that practice population is 88% White, 5% Black, 3% Asian, 2% Mixed and 1% other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 7th decile (7 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.
Under our previous methodology, at the last inspection in September 2015, the practice was rated good overall. This announced assessment was carried out due to the age of the last rating. We assessed all 5 key questions to establish if the services provided are safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.
During the assessment, we saw evidence of a good learning culture, where people could confidently raise concerns that were investigated thoroughly. The premises were clean and well maintained. The service had significantly outgrown its premises. Although we saw effective use of the limited space available, staff commented on challenges in recruiting additional staff to support increasing demand for services due to these limitations. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. 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 was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. 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. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities.
However, we found concerns related to governance systems, particularly those relating to review of patients prescribed medicines that required regular review, those at risk of a missed diagnosis of Chronic Kidney Disease and those with specific long-term conditions. As a result, the provider was found to be in breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We have issued the provider with a Warning Notice in response to the concerns found at this assessment. The service is now rated as requires improvement overall, with ratings of requires improvement for providing safe, effective and well-led care. We rated the provider good for providing caring and responsive services.
People's experience of this service
The practice encouraged and used feedback from people who used the service to make improvements. Both verbal and written complaints were investigated and used to drive improvement. Feedback from the NHS Friends and Family Test was positive. People we spoke with were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. The results of National GP Patient Survey published in July 2025 showed people were generally satisfied with services, however, scores for some areas were below local and national averages. In particular, the percentage of patients who responded positively to how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone was 32% compared to a national average of 53%. We saw evidence of an action plan created in response to the survey results and leaders were able to discuss measures implemented to improve satisfaction, including the introduction of a total triage system. There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. Representatives from the PPG described how they felt valued by the practice, were engaged and listened to by leaders.