- GP practice
Ottershaw Surgery
Assessment report published 20 May 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 9 March 2026 - 16 March 2026
Ottershaw Surgery is a GP practice in Surrey that delivers services to approximately 6300 patients under a contract held with NHS England. It is a practice within the Surrey Heartlands Integrated Care Board (ICB). This is the first inspection of the service since the provider changed.
The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 87% White and 7% Asian, and 6% Black, or originating from mixed or other ethnic groups. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 9 decile (9 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.
There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff aimed to deliver care which kept people safe and protected, but some risks were not fully identified or managed. Patients 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 practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure patients understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to patients and made decisions in the patients’ best interests where they did not have capacity.
Patients were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. Patients had choice in their care and treatment. The practice supported staff wellbeing.
Patients were involved in decisions about their care. The practice provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the practice took it seriously and acted on it. The practice was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. Patients received fair and equal care and treatment. The practice worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. Patients were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible and supportive, and helped staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Oversight of systems did not always identify risks to enable them to be effectively managed. Managers worked with the local community to understand their health needs and preferences.
However, we found a breach of regulation in relation to good governance. 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 positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Recent survey results, including from the 2025 NHS England GP Patient Survey and the NHS Friends and Family Test (FFT), showed people were satisfied with services. For example, the 2025 NHS England GP Patient Survey showed that 100% of people responding had an overall positive experience at their GP practice. This was above the local and national scores of 78% and 75% respectively. The FFT was also very positive with 99% of people responding rating the GP practice as ‘good’ or ‘very good’.
There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. There were 20 active patient members. Representatives described how the PPG operated in a collaborative and supportive way and focussed on opportunities for improvement. They described how the practice encouraged, respected and valued their involvement, and how this created a strong relationship between the practice and the PPG.