Gill Medical Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment in December 2015, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment in August 2026, the rating remains the same. This is because we did not find any concerns with the service providing safe care and treatment.

This service scored 78 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. People felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding. Staff were encouraged to raise concerns when things went wrong. There was a log of complaints and significant events. Lessons learnt from complaints and significant events were discussed during staff meetings and recorded in the meeting minutes to ensure an improved care for the patient population.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. There were systems in place for processing information relating to new patients. The service worked with other providers to deliver shared care and when patients moved between services. Referrals and test results were managed in a timely way.

The service worked well with people and healthcare partners to fully understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They had a clear focus on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. They always shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Safeguarding policies were in place and known to staff, who were appropriately trained in safeguarding procedures. The practice maintained a list of vulnerable people and acted on concerns working in partnership with other organisations. The practice ensured the local safeguarding team at the local authority could share information with the service and other GP practices could benefit from the initiative taken by this service by a change in policy by the local authority. This would ensure that no children at risk of harm and abuse were missed or omitted from safeguarding procedures and processes by reconciling the information held by GP practices are the same with that of the local safeguarding team or child protection services. The practice created a safeguarding toolkit for use and shared with other GP practices.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Emergency equipment was available and maintained. Staff could recognise a deteriorating patient and knew of action to take. Patients were advised on risks related to their condition and actions to take if their condition deteriorated.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Contracts were in place to ensure the premises were maintained. Health and safety risk assessments and audits had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed. There was a business continuity plan in place which was monitored and reviewed. The service ensured water safety by completing Legionella risk assessments and regular water testing.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. There were a range of clinical and non-clinical roles within the practice. We found training was up to date, learning needs and development of staff was managed appropriately, and staff were working within their agreed areas of competence. Safe recruitment practices were followed.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. The practice had a designated infection, prevention and control lead and all staff had had relevant training. Cleaning schedules were in place and followed. Risk assessments and audits were completed, and actions taken to mitigate risks.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened. Staff involved people in reviews of their medicines and helped them understand how to manage their medicines safely. People knew what to do and who to contact if their condition did not improve or they experienced any unexpected symptoms. Staff received regular training, were competency assessed on medicines optimisation, and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of medicines. Staff managed prescription stationery appropriately and securely.

Patient group directions (PGDs) authorised by appropriate clinicians were valid and up to date. The patient specific directions (PSDs) were similarly appropriate.

Staff followed protocols to ensure they prescribed all medicines safely, and ensured people received all recommended medicines reviews and monitoring. Medicines were stored securely and at appropriate temperatures. Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines, including emergency medicines and vaccines. Staff stored medical gases, such as oxygen, safely and completed required safety risk assessments. The service had risk assessments for some emergency medicines that were not available during the site visit.

The provider had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and medicine recalls. Vaccines fridges temperatures were recorded and there was a backup thermometer in the fridge. Staff understood the protocol to follow if the temperatures were out of the recommended range.

Staff followed established processes to ensure people prescribed medicines with specific risks received recommended monitoring and followed up on patients that did not engage with the service to complete required blood tests.

Staff took steps to ensure they prescribed medicines appropriately to optimise care outcomes, including antibiotics. For example, 2-cycle prescribing audits of medicines that could be abused were completed by the practice. The 2-cycle audit completed led to a creation of a structured medication review template to ensure clear medicine review and safety of the patients. However, the prescribing data reviewed as part of our assessment showed that the service needed to do more to ensure safe antimicrobial prescribing. The service informed us that the variation in data was a result of prescription done by the enhanced services at the primary care network (PCN) Hub and not at the practice level. The service informed us that they would speak to the enhanced services team to find a way to separate the prescribing going forward. For example, the number of antimicrobials issued by the provider was not lower than local and national averages. There was a programme of regular clinical audits of prescribing that focused on improving care and treatment.