East Shore Partnership

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating changed to Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. Improvements had been made in mitigating risks in relation to hot water systems, legionella and infection prevention and control. There were effective processes to assess and monitor human resources, recruitment and staffing arrangements. For example, induction procedures were in place to ensure staff were equipped in their roles, staff mandatory training compliance had been adhered to and there was regular documented clinical supervision for non-medical prescribers instigated by supervisors, including audits of prescribing.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment including the risk of fire, hot water systems and legionella bacteria. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Equipment was regularly risk assessed, tested, calibrated, stored safely and well maintained. The premises was clean and accessible. Continuity arrangements were in place should issues arose with the water systems and heating.

The provider 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 and four new GPs had been recruited. Administrative staff were managed effectively to ensure patient demand was met at both practice sites and to prevent lone working. We found training was kept up to date, learning needs and development of staff was managed appropriately. Staff such as non-medical prescribers were working within their agreed areas of competence. Safe recruitment practices were followed.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies where required.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) across both practice sites had improved. There was effective IPC leadership, with policies and checks carried out in relation to cleaning records and hand hygiene. Staff were aware of IPC procedures in place to ensure cleaning standards were adhered to, such as bodily fluid spillage kits, Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSSH) and clinical waste arrangements. We saw evidence of records to ensure previously identified risks had been mitigated such as regular carpet steam cleaning and pest control services.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.