All inspections: Olive Medical Practice

Date of Assessment: 16 January 2026 to 17 January 2026. Olive Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 7672 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 68% of patients are Asian, 27% White, and 5% Black, Mixed or Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 2nd decile (2 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.

We carried out an assessment of Olive Medical Practice in July 2025. The service was rated inadequate and placed into special measures. We took enforcement action in line with our published procedures.

The service runs a circumcision clinic under its registration for the regulated activity ‘surgical procedures’. This was not assessed in July 2025. This assessment was to assess the circumcision clinic aspect of the service only. The ratings and scores in the report published on 29 September 2025 remain unchanged. We did not assess all quality statements under each key question; we only assessed those quality statements directly relating to the circumcision clinic.

We found continued breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance, and a new breach of regulation in relation to the need for consent. The service remains in special measures.

Date of Assessment: 7 July 2025 to 10 July 2025. Olive Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 7672 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 68% of patients are Asian, 27% White, and 5% Black, Mixed or Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 2nd decile (2 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.

SAFE: Learning culture was not embedded to promote openness and ensure lessons were learned. Incidents were not always investigated thoroughly. Not all the required staff checks took place. We found issues with the management of medicines. The facilities and equipment did not meet the needs of people. Risks had not been identified by the provider and so had not been mitigated.

EFFECTIVE: Systems did not ensure that staff were up to date with or followed national guidance. People were involved in assessments of their needs. The system for making Do Not Attempt Cardio-pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) did not allow for decisions to be reviewed or check they had been made appropriately. National GP Patient Survey results were below average in this area.

CARING: People were usually treated with kindness and compassion, but there were issues with the privacy of patients. 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. National GP Patient Survey results were below average in this area.

RESPONSIVE: Complaints were not effectively or consistently managed; there was no clear guidance for staff to follow. People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People received fair and equal care and treatment. National GP Patient Survey results were below average in this area.

WELL-LED: Leaders at all levels did not fully understand the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support. They did not show they had the skills, knowledge, or experience to lead effectively. The practice did not have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. Risks had not been identified, and risks that had been highlighted to the practice had not been acted on.

We found breaches of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, good governance and fit and proper persons employed.

This service is being placed into special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

We carried out an announced inspection at Olive Medical Practice on 11 August 2021.

Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - good

Effective -good

Caring - good

Responsive – requires improvement

Well-led - good

Following our previous comprehensive inspection on 25 September 2019 the practice was rated requires improvement overall, with the key question Safe rated as inadequate and the rating of requires improvement for the other four key questions -effective, caring, responsive and well led. The practice was issued a warning notice for breach of regulation 12(1) Safe care and treatment and a requirement notice for regulation 17(1) Good governance. A follow up inspection to check the practice had taken action in response to the warning notice was undertaken in January 2020 where we observed that all the areas identified in the warning notice had been addressed.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Olive Medial Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection to follow up on concerns identified previously. The inspection found significant improvements in the key questions safe and well led and both of these are now rated good. We rated the practice as good for providing effective services, however the population group for working age people (including those recently retired and students) was rated as requires improvement as cervical screening data for 2019/20 remains below target. Caring was rated good however responsive services was rated as requires improvement as published patient feedback was negative.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included

Conducting several staff interviews using video conferencing.
Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider.
Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
Requesting evidence from the provider.
A short site visit.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

what we found when we inspected
information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as Good overall.

We found that:

A comprehensive quality improvement plan had been implemented and effective progress and achievement made in improving service delivery in many areas. Governance, risk management, and systems to promote safe and effective care and treatment were in place.

The improvements observed at our follow up inspection in January 2020 in relation to safeguarding matters had continued to develop and improve to ensure patients identified as at risk were monitored effectively. Patients were appropriately coded on the safeguarding registers and a comprehensive risk assessment process was in place.

Systems to monitor babies, children and young people non-attendance at appointments both at the GP practice and at secondary care appointments were monitored and responded to.

Action was taken to ensure test results and allocated clinical tasks were responded to in a timely manner with appropriate action implemented in response to patient safety alerts.

A system to monitor clinical decision making for those working in advanced clinical roles was established.

The practice recognised patient dissatisfaction with telephone access and were in the process of negotiating a new telecommunication system to improve access for patients.

The practice team were working hard to improve performance data such as cervical screening and childhood immunisations. The practice actively sought patient feedback and used this to improve service quality.

The practice had implemented systems to ensure they provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm. This included implementing and following national and local guidelines to keep people safe throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.

The practice team were positive and enthusiastic. They told us there had been a cultural shift to inclusive team work and they were all working together to provide a quality service with patients.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

Continue to develop and implement initiatives to improve telephone access and to improve feedback on their experience of the practice.
Continue to review and improve the records of patients who are carers.
Continue to monitor and document improvements for cervical screening and immunisations children.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Olive Medical Practice on 25 September 2019. The inspection identified shortfalls in meeting the required standards and the practice was rated as Requires Improvement overall with key question Safe and population group Working age people (including those recently retired and students) rated as inadequate. The key questions Effective, Caring, Responsive, Well Led and the other population groups were rated as requires improvement. We issued a warning notice for breach of Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 (Safe care and treatment).

The full comprehensive report for the September 2019 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Olive Medical Practice on our website at

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 28 January 2020 to assess the progress achieved by the practice in implementing their plan to meet the legal requirements identified in the warning notice for breach of regulation 12. We did not rate the service or key question Safe at this inspection. The practice rating remains Requires improvement overall. A further comprehensive inspection will be carried out in the near future in accordance with our inspection methodology to further monitor improvements and update the practice ratings accordingly.

At this inspection we found:

Good progress in meeting the requirements of the warning notice had been achieved.
Evidence presented demonstrated positive achievement and progress in improving safeguarding processes. Work alongside the clinical commissioning group (CCG) safeguarding team and other GP practices in the locality was in progress to ensure clear and consistent record keeping and patient safeguarding coding was established.
The practice now implemented ‘did not attend appointment’ and ‘child not brought to appointment’ policies. The implementation of the policies was subject to weekly checks and monthly audits to ensure patients who had missed appointments were followed up.
There was now a system for reviewing test results, including cytology, in a timely manner, which had resulted in no backlog of results waiting to be reviewed.
The practice was part of a pilot scheme whereby correspondence work flow was reviewed and sorted at a ‘hub’ location. At the time of this visit, the hub had experienced some problems which resulted in a backlog of electronic correspondence for the practice to review. The hub had assured the practice that all urgent correspondence had been responded to and actioned. A plan to address the backlog of correspondence was being implemented.
Monitoring of the decision making of those working in advanced clinical roles was established.
Systems to monitor, review and respond to patient safety alerts were comprehensive and effective.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Olive Medical Practice on 25 September 2019. This was the first inspection of this service for this provider. The GP partnership providing the services at Olive Medical Practice took over the NHS contract in November 2018 and completed their registration with the CQC in August 2019.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

What we found when we inspected
Information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
Information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as requires improvement overall.

The GP practice was previously registered under a different provider and rated inadequate. The current registered GP partnership renamed the practice to Olive Medical Practice. The practice team were committed to improving the service they provided and were implementing a range of action plans to improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

We rated the practice as inadequate for providing safe services because:

Processes around coding patients on the safeguarding register were incomplete.
Action to follow up patients who did not attend appointments including those with a child protection plan in place was not undertaken
Timely action in responding to patient reports and allocated clinical tasks was not evident and action to ‘complete’ actioned tasks was not implemented consistently.
Timely action reviewing test results, including cytology reports was not evident.
Monitoring of the decision making of those working in advanced clinical roles was not established.
Systems to respond to patient safety alerts were not comprehensive.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing effective, caring, responsive and well led services and five of the population groups because:

Some performance data was below target levels, including children’s immunisation
Feedback through the patient survey was below that of the local and England averages.
Patient feedback indicated concerns with appointment and telephone access. The practice had responded to this by providing more appointments and introducing a patient ‘query’ system.
Comprehensive quality improvement action plans were being implemented.
The practice team were positive and enthusiastic. They told us there had been a cultural shift to inclusive team work and they were all working together to provide a quality service with patients.

We rated the practice inadequate for services provided for population group Working age people (including those recently retired and students) because:

There were gaps in the range of services available to this group of patients
Cervical screening was significantly below national averages

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.
Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

(Please see the specific details on action required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

Make available a child pulse oximeter.
Take action to improve the records of patients who are also carers
Take action to improve achievements for cervical screening and immunisations children.
Take action to remove signage including electronic information relation the previous name of the GP surgery.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Olive Medical Practice

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

During an assessment under our new approach

11 August 2021

During a routine inspection

28 January 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

25 September 2019

During a routine inspection

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care