Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory

LPS - Weatheroak Medical Practice, Sparkhill, Birmingham.

LPS - Weatheroak Medical Practice in Sparkhill, Birmingham is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, maternity and midwifery services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 14th September 2017

LPS - Weatheroak Medical Practice is managed by LPS - Weatheroak Medical Practice.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      LPS - Weatheroak Medical Practice
      35 Warwick Road
      Sparkhill
      Birmingham
      B11 4RA
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01217720352

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2017-09-14
    Last Published 2017-09-14

Local Authority:

    Birmingham

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

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.

5th July 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at LPS Weatheroak Medical Practice on 17 October and 1 November 2016. The overall rating for the practice was inadequate and the practice was placed in special measures for a period of six months. The full comprehensive report on the inspection carried out on 17 October and 1 November 2016 was published on 25 January 2017, and can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for LPS Weatheroak Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

On 5 July 2017 we carried out an announced, follow-up comprehensive inspection to confirm 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 17 October and 1 November 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

We found the practice had carried out detailed analysis of the previous inspection findings, and had then sought support from and involved stakeholders including the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and Patient Participation Group (PPG). The practice had then made extensive changes which had resulted in significant improvements. Practice staff had taken responsibility for embedding and maintaining these improvements themselves. There was evidence of a cultural and leadership change within the practice, and we saw a positive approach to performance and improvement throughout.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • People were protected by a strong, comprehensive safety system and a focus on openness, transparency and learning when things went wrong.

  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.

  • Arrangements for managing medicines kept patients safe.

  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment, including regular training updates.

  • Patient outcomes were above local and national averages.

  • The practice had appropriate arrangements to identify patients who were carers to enable them to receive care, treatment and support that meets their needs.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

  • Patients’ satisfaction with how they could access care and treatment was in line with or above local and national averages.

  • Information about services and how to complain was available in a range of languages. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints, concerns and patient feedback.

  • There was effective oversight, planning and responses to practice performance.

  • 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.

  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The practice is now rated as good for providing safe services, for providing effective services, for providing caring services, for providing responsive services, and for being well-led. The overall rating for the practice is now good.

I am taking this service out of special measures. This recognises the significant improvements made to the quality of care provided by the service.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice
1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at LPS Weatheroak Medical Practice on 17 October and 1 November 2016. The overall rating for the practice was inadequate and the practice was placed in special measures for a period of six months. The full comprehensive report on the inspection carried out on 17 October and 1 November 2016 was published on 25 January 2017, and can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for LPS Weatheroak Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

On 5 July 2017 we carried out an announced, follow-up comprehensive inspection to confirm 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 17 October and 1 November 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

We found the practice had carried out detailed analysis of the previous inspection findings, and had then sought support from and involved stakeholders including the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and Patient Participation Group (PPG). The practice had then made extensive changes which had resulted in significant improvements. Practice staff had taken responsibility for embedding and maintaining these improvements themselves. There was evidence of a cultural and leadership change within the practice, and we saw a positive approach to performance and improvement throughout.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • People were protected by a strong, comprehensive safety system and a focus on openness, transparency and learning when things went wrong.

  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.

  • Arrangements for managing medicines kept patients safe.

  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment, including regular training updates.

  • Patient outcomes were above local and national averages.

  • The practice had appropriate arrangements to identify patients who were carers to enable them to receive care, treatment and support that meets their needs.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

  • Patients’ satisfaction with how they could access care and treatment was in line with or above local and national averages.

  • Information about services and how to complain was available in a range of languages. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints, concerns and patient feedback.

  • There was effective oversight, planning and responses to practice performance.

  • 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.

  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The practice is now rated as good for providing safe services, for providing effective services, for providing caring services, for providing responsive services, and for being well-led. The overall rating for the practice is now good.

I am taking this service out of special measures. This recognises the significant improvements made to the quality of care provided by the service.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: