Cookie policy notice

By continuing to use this site you agree to our cookies policy below:
Since 26 May 2011, the law now states that cookies on websites can ony be used with your specific consent. Cookies allow us to ensure that you enjoy the best browsing experience.

This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Practice overturns CQC rating despite its concerns being dismissed by chief inspector

Exclusive The CQC has apologised and re-rated a GP practice after admitting to errors during the inspection, after its original appeal was dismissed by the chief inspector of primary care, Professor Steve Field.

The regulator admitted that ‘due process’ had not been followed when issuing a rating of ‘needs improvement’ for the Bristol University Students’ Health Service in March, including elements of good and outstanding practice not being reflected in the final report.

It changed the rating to ‘good’ in the final inspection report.

However, this was after the practice received a letter from Professor Steve Field dismissing the practice’s concerns, saying he had been ‘assured’ that the original inspection and rating was fair.

The CQC said overturning of a decision only happened in ‘exceptional circumstances’.

But the practice’s lead GP, Dr Dominique Thompson, argued the positive outcome is ‘an important message for colleagues’ that they should be challenging what they see as unfair inspections.

Dr Thompson had complained that the CQC’s inspection had failed in ‘due care’ in both the preparation and assessment of the practice.

In a letter to the regulator in March, she highlighted what she saw as unfair elements of the inspection report, including inspectors:

  • Asking a range of questions on elderly care despite being informed that the practice’s list consists entirely of university students.
  • Dismissing out of hand ‘award-winning’ innovations in young people’s healthcare.
  • Using a tone that was ‘at times patronising and inappropriate’.

The letter added that staff were left ‘demoralised and disappointed’ by the inspection report, and that Dr Thompson was left ‘personally speechless’ when inspectors suggested the practice had not sufficiently demonstrated it was ‘caring’ towards patients

Dr Thompson asked for a re-inspection, and added that poor CQC ratings ‘have the potential to make a substantial impact on the ability of a practice to retain and recruit new staff, and attract funding, and ultimately its capacity to remain in business’.

However, in a reply sent to Dr Thompson a month later, Professor Field said he had ‘been assured’ via interviews with the inspection team that it was ‘experienced’ in general practice inspection in ‘many different settings’ and that this concluded the investigation into the complaint ‘which has not been upheld’.

But following a mediation meeting requested via the LMC, the CQC lead inspector did re-visit the practice, acknowledged that the first inspection had been lacking and re-rated the practice as good in all areas but one.

Dr Thompson told Pulse: ‘I think it can be very intimidating taking on a national organisation but if you are strong in your conviction that this is an error and they haven’t done a competent inspection I would encourage people to take it on.’

Last week Dr Thompson, who said she ‘didn’t sleep for three months’ during the ordeal, received a letter of apology from CQC head of general practice in the south region, Garry Higgins.

Mr Higgins admitted ‘due process in line with CQC policy was not followed’ and that that ‘examples of both good and outstanding practice demonstrated during the inspection were not reflected within the [draft] inspection report’.

He added: ‘I would like to assure you that lessons have been learnt and actions taken [and] convey my apologies for any anxieties caused.’

A CQC spokesperson said: ‘The ratings for this practice were reviewed as part of the CQC quality assurance and factual accuracy checking process. This only happens in exceptional circumstances, where information has not been available or collected on the inspection.’

It comes as it recently emerged that the CQC is reorganising its inspections in a bid to build better relationships with GP practices, with a lead inspector set to be named in each CCG area who will carry out the majority of inspections.

Readers' comments (26)

  • "lessons have been learnt and actions taken"isnt this the same type of beurocratic bull that was spouted after stafford and countless other omnishambles happening during the near past,and still the cockups come.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why hasn't Field apologised?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How many more 'lessons have been learned' statements are CQC planning to publish? They seem to learn very little.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What lessons has Field learned?

    CQC has to be the most vicious, nasty, self-centred organisation in modern Britain.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Would Pulse please put in an FOI request to make CQC publish what lessons they have learned and what actions have been taken.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This comment has been removed by the moderator.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Our practice demonstrated good practice across all CQC measurements, and there were no significant areas of concern.

    What did disappoint was that in several areas where the practice has been innovative, or gone above and beyond there was no recognition of this and very little praise if any, which turned the outcome into a demoralising one, even though we are rated 'Good'

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • And still he doesn't resign. Dr Field: RESIGN.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Need a FULLY independent body to regulate healthcare. Not more dysfunctional, politically controlled Mickey Mouse quangos to add to the farce that is the 'modern NHS'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say

IMPORTANT: On Wednesday 7 December 2016, we implemented a new log in system, and if you have not updated your details you may experience difficulties logging in. Update your details here. Only GMC-registered doctors are able to comment on this site.