Updated 27 November 2025
Date of Assessment: 1 July 2026 to 08 July 2026. Seaton Surgery is a GP provider and delivers services to just over 4,000 people under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Provider Profile indicated that the provider served a predominantly White population (97.5%). Patients from Asian, Mixed, Black and other ethnic backgrounds made up a small proportion of the registered population, accounting for 1.3%, 0.5%, 0.3% and 0.4% respectively. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the provider population group is in the 5th decile (5 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the provider population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the provider, the context the provider was working within and how this impacted provider delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
The provider had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers ensured staff received appropriate training and appraisals to support high quality care. While overall compliance was good, some gaps were identified in learning disability training and staff records. The provider acted promptly to address these issues and strengthen governance arrangements.
Medicines were generally managed safely, and people were involved in planning changes to their treatment. Some concerns were identified around coding, medication reviews, gastroprotection, and monitoring of long-term conditions. The provider acted promptly to address these issues and strengthened clinical oversight, monitoring, and prescribing safety processes to reduce the risk of recurrence.
People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good provider. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving providers. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The provider supported staff wellbeing.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The provider provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the provider took it seriously and acted on it. The provider was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. The provider worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.