Updated 13 March 2026
Date of Assessment: 08 May 2026 to 18 May 2026. Acocks Green Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to approximately 5305 people under a contract held with NHS England. Acocks Green Medical Centre is part of the Health and Beyond Partnership, an organisation operating across Sandwell, Birmingham and Wolverhampton, providing NHS services to more than 30,000 people. The partnership holds a corporate governance structure consisting of an executive board, operational and clinical management groups, as well as partner leads within each surgery. The organisation operates 9 surgeries.
The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 44% White, 40% Asian, 4% Mixed, 6% Black and 6% other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the first decile (1 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 announced comprehensive assessment of all 5 key questions (Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-Led). Remote clinical searches were carried out on 05 May 2026, and the site visit was on 8 May 2026.
At the previous inspection in November 2023, the practice was rated Requires Improvement overall. The practice was rated Requires Improvement for Safe, Effective and Well‑led with a breach in regulation 12(1) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in Safe care and treatment. The practice was rated Good for Caring and Responsive.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. However, there were some gaps in the management of risk such as not maintaining a complete stock of recommended emergency medicines. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.
People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and made decisions in the person’s best interests when they did not have capacity. However, the service was below the national target for childhood immunisations and cervical screening uptake. The provider was able to demonstrate that they were proactive in encouraging uptake with parents and guardians such as through messages and telephone calls.
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. 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.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to discuss difficult or complex patient needs or seek advice.
However, we found that the service did not always ensure that people at risk were followed up effectively. Children were not always immunised at the recommended ages. They did not have systems to ensure that they verified immunisation status, or training such as Safeguarding of locum and temporary staff. They also did not have an effective system of Health and Safety audits which failed to note that an emergency pull cord was missing from an accessible bathroom.