Beechwood Group Practice, Workington.Beechwood Group Practice in Workington is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning services, maternity and midwifery services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 13th February 2018 Contact Details:
Ratings:For a guide to the ratings, click here. Further Details:Important Dates:
Local Authority:
Link to this page: Inspection Reports:Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.
19th January 2018 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
![]() Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Beechwood Group Practice on 14 April 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. After the comprehensive inspection the practice wrote to us to say what they would do to address the areas which required improvement. We undertook an announced focused inspection on 15 December 2016 to check that the practice had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements The overall rating of the practice was changed to good, but remained rated as requiring improvement for leadership. The full comprehensive report on the April 2016 inspection and the report for focused inspection in December 2016 can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Beechwood Group Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 19 January 2018 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 15 December 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.
The practice is rated as good overall including for providing safe services.
Our key findings were as follows:
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
15th December 2016 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
![]() Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this practice on 14 April 2016. Breaches of legal requirements were found. Overall, we rated the practice as requires improvement.
After the comprehensive inspection the practice wrote to us to say what they would do to address four identified breaches of regulation. We undertook this focused inspection on 15 December 2016 to check that the practice had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection and our focused inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Beechwood Group Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Overall the practice is now rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
There were areas of practice where the provider must make improvements:
There were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
14th April 2016 - During a routine inspection
![]() Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Beechwood Group Practice on 14 April 2016. Overall, the practice is rated as requires improvement.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
There were areas of practice where the provider must make improvements:
There were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:
Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice
27th January 2014 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
![]() We first inspected this practice on the 7 August 2013 and found the provider to be non-compliant with a number of outcomes. We undertook this inspection on the 27 January 2014 to assess the improvements the practice had made regarding compliance to outcomes. We found that all staff had completed safeguarding training at level 1, and some staff were to attend level 2 training in May 2014. The new practice manager was aware that the recruitment process was unsafe but since their appointment they had introduced a robust recruitment process. This ensured that staff employed were suitable for the role they were to undertake. We saw that cleanliness was now of a good standard. A deep clean had been undertaken by a cleaning company and a contract had been entered into with this company for the ongoing cleaning of all areas of the practice. However security arrangements remained a concern as it was possible for people to enter the rear of the premises, via the disabled access, and walk through the premises to the reception area unobserved. We reinforced this with the provider that it was urgent that this work be carried out given the risk. During this inspection we saw evidence that staff training had been improved. One member of staff stated that since the last inspection there had been, “Massive changes …with cleaning, staff training, and in a number of areas”. Another member of staff commented that they were working through the on line training and found this, “Helpful….quite good”. Although the practice manager had not been able to develop an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received since she had been employed, she could confirm, and we saw, that she had an action plan in place to take this forward. This would ensure that the premises and service provision was monitored to ensure quality and safety.
7th August 2013 - During a routine inspection
![]() All of the patients we spoke with confirmed that the doctor and the staff always explained what they were going to do and were happy with the service they received. People told us, “The phones are answered quickly” and “Brilliant receptionists”. We were also told that, “All staff are always helpful and pleasant.” Most of the patients we spoke with confirmed that they felt confident that the doctor understood their condition. One patient told us, “I spend the appropriate amount of time with the GP. I feel I receive good explanations and understand everything.” We did find that the doors to all surgeries were not locked when not in use. All rooms were not situated in the sight line of the receptionists. Décor throughout the building was generally dated, apart from the treatment rooms which had been refurbished a few years ago. The general standard of cleanliness throughout the premises was poor. Evidence was not available to support that staff had undertaken mandatory and or workplace appropriate training. There was no apparent system in place for the recording, monitoring and maintaining of staff training records. We asked about audit activity undertaken by the practice. However, there was no programme of systematic audits undertaken other than the QOF requirements so the provider could not demonstrate to us how they assessed and monitored the quality of the service provided.
|
Latest Additions:
|