The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Coventry Road Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2314 Coventry Road, Sheldon, Birmingham, West Midlands, B26 3JS (0121) 743 2154

Provided and run by:
Coventry Road Practice

All Inspections

22 November 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced assessment of Coventry Road Practice on 22 November 2023.

This was a targeted review of responsive services. The practice was previously inspected in January 2019 and had previously been rated good overall and good in safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Any previous ratings for the overall rating, safe, effective, caring, and well-led will be unchanged following this assessment.

Rating at this assessment:

Responsive – Good.

Why we carried out this review

We carried out this assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet demand for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers.

We recognise the work that GP practices have been engaged in to continue to provide safe, quality care to the people they serve. We know colleagues are doing this while demand for general practice remains exceptionally high, with more appointments being provided than ever. In this challenging context, access to general practice remains a concern for people. Our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. These assessments of the responsive key question include looking at what practices are doing innovatively to improve patient access to primary care and sharing this information to drive improvement.

How we carried out the assessment

This assessment was carried out virtually, through an online meeting and review of documents. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A virtual meeting with the provider.

Our findings

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

  • what we found when we carried out the assessment
  • 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 for responsive services.

We found that:

  • The practice had a proactive approach to identifying the needs of patients and responding to them. This included addressing barriers faced by migrants in accessing health services and promoting a ‘safe practice’ for vulnerable groups.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way. Data from the national GP survey showed the practice performed consistently positively for access on the telephone.
  • A wide range of clinical staff were employed directly by the practice or indirectly via their network. Patients could choose preferred appointment types as appropriate.
  • Demand and capacity were monitored regularly in collaboration with staff to ensure appointment numbers met the needs of patients.
  • Feedback from patients was positive about how caring and accommodating all staff were.
  • The practice dealt with complaints in a timely manner and learned from them.

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

24/01/2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Coventry Road Practice

on 24 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 provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for recording, reporting and learning from significant events. 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.
  • There was clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse and for identifying and mitigating risks of health and safety.
  • The practice reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines and best practice.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Patients told us that all staff treated them with kindness and respect and that they felt involved in discussions about their treatment options.
  • Patients considered that staff were friendly and helpful.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients said that they could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support effective governance.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care and contributed to the strong teamwork and high staff morale.
  • There was evidence of collaborative working with local practices and the North Solihull Collaborative, a group of 11 local GP practices.
  • The practice took an active part in research projects.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

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

  • Ensure the process for logging significant events is fully embedded to enable the provider to review actions and identify any trends.
  • Review processes in place to improve uptake of childhood vaccinations for those aged 1.

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

18 November 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We undertook a planned, comprehensive inspection on 18 November 2014. We spoke with patients, staff and the practice management team.

The overall rating for the practice was good. We found the practice was safe, effective, responsive, caring and well led.

The care provided to the six population groups (people with long term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people, older people, people in vulnerable groups and people experiencing poor mental health) was good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • There were systems in place to address incidents and safeguard vulnerable adults and children who used the service. Significant events were recorded, lessons learnt were shared with staff and there was evidence that systems were changed so that patient care was improved.
  • We saw evidence that the GPs challenged poor care and worked with other professionals to improve clinical outcomes for patients. The practice had effective procedures in place that ensured care and treatment was delivered in line with appropriate standards.
  • Patients were treated with dignity and respect. Patients spoke very positively of their experiences and of the care and treatment provided by staff.
  • The practice understood its patient population and planned its services to reflect the diverse needs of its patients
  • Systems were in place to monitor the effectiveness of the service, identify and manage risks or learn from previous incidents. There was a clear leadership structure in place, quality and performance are monitored and risks were identified and managed.

We saw an area of outstanding practice including:

  • The practice carried out an audit on repeat prescribing and findings were shared with other practices in the locality so improvements could be made.

However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

  • The practice should consider the risks from legionella that may affect staff, patients and visitors and take suitable precautions
  • The practice should review its recruitment procedures to ensure that only suitable staff are employed to work at the practice.
  • Ensure DBS checks are carried out for staff that undertake chaperoning duties.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice