- GP practice
Colney Hatch Lane Surgery
Assessment report published 1 May 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 21 May 2025 to 28 May 2025. Colney Hatch Lane Surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to approximately 5200 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that almost 63% of the practice population are white ethnicity, 13% are Asian, 8% are Black and the remaining 16% of mixed ethnicity. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the service population group is in the 6th decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
This assessment was undertaken because of a change of provider of the services registered at this location.
SAFE: The service had a learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents. Policies were in place to keep people protected and safe. The service understood but did not always manage risks, with regards to management not ensuring all staff undertook required annual training. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained. Staff managed medicines and involved patients in planning any changes.
EFFECTIVE: People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Overall, care was based on evidence and good practice. The service monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it, but this was not always consistent. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. 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.
CARING: People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment.
RESPONSIVE: People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. For example, the service offered access to interpreter services and information was available in a variety of formats such as, braille, or large print. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback.
WELL-LED: Leaders had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust, however this was not thoroughly embedded throughout the service and with all staff working at the service. Leaders were visible and knowledgeable, although not all staff felt that management and leaders were entirely supportive. Staff told us that they were not always supported to give feedback and were not always treated respectfully. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There were enough staff with the right qualifications, but not always with the required skills and experience. 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.
We found breaches of regulation in relation to Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
People were generally positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Recent survey results, including from the National GP Patient Survey and the NHS Friends and Family Test, showed people were satisfied with services. The service did not have an active patient participation group (PPG) to represent the views of people using the service. The service showed us that they gather patient feedback using other mechanisms such as the NHS Friends and Family Test.