A year-and-a-half after being placed in special measures, a Croydon GP practice has once again failed a government inspection.

In May 2016, the South Norwood Hill Medical Centre, on Norwood Hill, was rated inadequate by inspectors from the Care Quality Commission and placed in special measures.

Since then, two more inspections have been carried out, including the most recent one on September 14 this year.

The report following that inspection, released this week, reveals that while inspectors saw improvements in some areas, not enough had been done, and the practice was once again rated inadequate.

The report said: "There was a lack of effective oversight of infection and prevention control as a whole, both in policy and in practice.

"The practice systems were not always effective at identifying issues that required action before they were identified by other organisations. Once identified, the practice reacted, but not always sufficiently to completely address the issue.

"Infection prevention and control systems had improved, with improved cleanliness and systems, but there were still some issues with ensuring the practice was appropriately and consistently clean.

"Checks of medicines and related equipment stored in the practice were not carried out consistently to ensure that they remained safe and effective."

Inspectors did find that the recruiting process - which had been a cause for concern- had improved since the previous inspection.

"When we inspected on February 1, 2017, we found that the systems to keep people safe from abuse were not consistently implemented, as the practice was not applying the same standard of recruitment checks and training criteria to locum staff," the report said.

"On this inspection, we looked at the files of two recently recruited staff, one clinical locum staff member and one non-clinical permanent staff member.

"Both had had the appropriate recruitment checks, for example, proof of identification, references, qualifications, registration with the appropriate professional body and the appropriate checks through the Disclosure and Barring Service, although the practice had accepted a personal reference for the non-clinical staff member (rather than a second employment reference) without a documented risk assessment for this decision."

The recent inspection also found that medicines used to deal with common medical emergencies - which were not present in the 2016 inspection - were now available, although the monthly check to ensure they remained in date had not been carried out in two months.

"Three of the medicines were due to expire at the end of September 2017, and three devices (BD vacutainer safety locs) in the anaphylaxis kits had expired in August 2017."

"One member of staff we asked was unclear as to the location of the emergency medicines."

The GP must now send the CQC a report that says what action will be taken to meet these requirements.

The GP practice has been contacted for a comment.