The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

West Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1st Floor, 183-195 North Road, Westcliff On Sea, Essex, SS0 7AF (01702) 339865

Provided and run by:
Dr Cordess and Partners

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about West Road Surgery on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about West Road Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

6 December 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced assessment of the Responsive key question at West Road Surgery on 6 December 2023. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection

Effective - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection

Caring - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection

Responsive - requires improvement

Well-led - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection

We recognise the pressure that practices are currently working under and the efforts staff are making to maintain levels of access for their patients. At the same time, our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care.

Although we saw the practice was attempting to improve access, this was not yet reflected in the GP patient survey data or other sources of patient feedback. Therefore, the rating is requires improvement, as ratings depend on evidence of impact and must reflect the lived experience that people were reporting at the time of inspection.

Following our previous inspection on 3 April 2019, the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities, to look specifically at access and the other areas covered by the Responsive key question.

How we carried out the inspection/review

This assessment was carried out in a way without the need for a visit. We:

  • assessed data
  • spoke to staff using video conferencing
  • looked at written evidence using video conferencing.

Our findings

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

  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • Patients were not always able to access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • There were particular issues with the ease with which patients could contact the practice by telephone. The practice had made some changes to try to improve telephone access, but were constrained by the telephone system in place. The telephone system was due to be replaced, as part of a national initiative, by March 2024.
  • Complaints were listened and responded to and used to improve the quality of care.

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

  • Continue to monitor and take steps to improve telephone and appointment access.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care

22 Jan 2019 to 22 Jan 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at West Road Surgery on 22 January 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

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 and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from preventable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice listened to their patients and organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The practice continually audited and developed the services they provided to ensure patient outcomes and satisfaction was improved.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • Leaders had the capacity and skills to deliver high-quality, sustainable care.
  • Staff told us they felt supported, valued and that management listened to their opinions.
  • There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

Areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • The practice should continue to monitor the prescribing of hypnotics to work towards a level comparable with local and national averages.
  • The practice should continue the work to reduce the exception reporting rate for patients with diabetes.

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

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

31 March 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at West Road Surgery on 31 March 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • The practice referred to and used published safety information to monitor and improve safety outcomes for patients. Staff reported concerns about patient safety and when things went wrong these were fully investigated. Learning from safety incidents was shared with staff to minimise recurrences.
  • All equipment was routinely checked, serviced and calibrated in line with the manufacturer’s instructions.
  • Risks to patients and staff were assessed and managed. There were risk assessments in place for areas including fire safety, infection control, health and safety, premises and equipment. There was information available in relation to the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) such as cleaning materials.
  • There was a detailed business continuity plan in place to deal with any untoward incidents which may disrupt the running of the practice. This described relevant staff roles and responsibilities and the actions they should take in event of disruption to the services.
  • Appropriate checks including employment references, proof of identity and registration with professional bodies (where appropriate) and DBS checks were carried out when new staff were employed to work at the practice.
  • Newly employed staff undertook a period of role specific induction. Thus helped new staff to familiarise themselves with the practice policies, procedures and ways of working.
  • Staff received training, and ongoing support to enable them to carry out their roles and responsibilities.
  • There were arrangements in place for managing medicines. These were stored securely and there were systems in place for checking that medicines were in date and available in sufficient quantities.
  • Emergency equipment and medicines were available in line with current guidance and legislation.

  • The practice used published guidelines, reviews and audits to monitor how patients’ needs were assessed and the delivery of care and treatment.

  • Clinical audits were carried out routinely to monitor and improve outcomes for patients.

  • Patients consent to care and treatment was sought in line with current legislation and guidance.

  • Patients said they were treated with respect and care. They said that they were very happy with the care that they received. They told us that staff were professional, welcoming and caring.
  • Information about how to complain / escalate concerns should patients remain dissatisfied was available. Complaints were investigated and responded to appropriately and apologies given to patients when things went wrong or they experienced poor care or services.
  • The practice had facilities and equipment to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • The premises were accessible to patients with disabilities and had step free access, disabled access toilet facilities and a hearing loop.
  • Translation services were available as required.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • GPs worked with other health, social care professionals and the local CCG to ensure that patients received care and treatment in a consistent and coordinated way.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice