Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Jubilee Park Medical Partnership, Carlton, Nottingham.

Jubilee Park Medical Partnership in Carlton, Nottingham 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 6th March 2019

Jubilee Park Medical Partnership is managed by Park House Medical Centre.

Contact Details:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

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

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-03-06
    Last Published 2019-03-06

Local Authority:

    Nottinghamshire

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.

7th February 2019 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park House Medical Centre on 7 February 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 but effective was rated as requires improvement. This was because we rated two population groups as requires improvement: people with long-term conditions and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing effective services because:

  • Some outcomes were below CCG and national averages for people with long term conditions and people with mental health.

The overall rating for this practice was Good. However, the population groups were rated as requires improvement because some outcomes were below CCG and national averages for people with long term conditions and people with mental health.

We rated the practice as good for providing safe, caring, responsive and well-led services because:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Ensure evidence of compliance for site-related issues is readily available from the contractor or landlord.
  • Ensure all Patient Group Directions are appropriately completed.
  • Improve outcomes for people with long term conditions and mental health in line with CCG and national averages.

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

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

13th January 2015 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We inspected this practice on 13 January 2015 as part of our new comprehensive inspection programme. This is the first time we have inspected this practice.

The overall rating for this service is good. We found the practice to be good in the safe, effective, caring responsive and well led domains. We found the practice provided good care to people with long term conditions, families, children and young people and people in vulnerable circumstances, older people, working age people and people experiencing poor mental health.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Patients told us they were satisfied with the appointments system and told they could see a GP when they needed to.
  • Patients were kept safe from the risk and spread of infection as the provider had carried out audits and acted on their findings
  • Patients were treated with dignity and respect and spoken to in a friendly manner by all staff
  • Systems were in place to keep patients safe by assessing risk and taking steps to reduce this. We saw evidence of learning from previous incidents.
  • Patients, their relatives and carers were involved in all aspects of treatment and their opinions were listened to and acted upon.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: