Dental Arts - Harrogate Also known as Ace Denta Ltd

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 found this practice was providing safe care in line with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The practice identified and managed risks effectively and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety, and lone working. Improvements were required to staff knowledge of identifying sepsis and we have since been sent evidence that further online training has been carried out to support this.

Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. They felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and this was mostly reflected in our findings.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines that were checked in line with national guidance. They knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines.

The practice managed fire safety well, and fire exits were clear and well signposted. However, we noted that fire awareness training had not been completed for 2 members of staff. Following the inspection, we received evidence this had been completed. Fire alarm checks were not being documented in line with recognised guidance. We raised this with the provider who assured us they would be documented going forward.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. However, some hazardous substances were out of date and not stored safely in a decommissioned onsite laboratory. The provider assured us that this would be addressed in a timely manner.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. The compressor had been serviced but did not have a current pressure vessel inspection, a safety check required under Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000 (PSSR) due to the type of compressor. We received evidence from the provider that this had been booked in for 24 August 2026.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, including agency or locum staff.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

Newly appointed staff had an appropriate role specific structured induction.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were enough staff on duty at all times. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew how to escalate safeguarding concerns within the practice and externally.

The practice ensured staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. We noted oversight of training could be improved. We did not see evidence of training for learning disability and autism awareness or fire awareness training for 2 members of staff, and safeguarding training was out-of-date for 1 member of staff. Since the inspection, we have received evidence that these have been completed.

There were effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during annual appraisals, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Staff we spoke with felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance.

Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance.

The practice had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance.
However, the practice had not actioned recommendations from the external Legionella risk assessment dated 12 September 2024, despite this being highlighted to them on previous inspections. The risk assessment actions stated the dead legs posed a medium risk and recommended removal and to ensure lesser used outlets were being flushed, with documentation to show this had been completed. We highlighted this to staff on the day and were assured that this would be implemented. The provider arranged after the inspection to have the dead legs removed.

The risk assessment also had an action to ensure lesser used outlets were being flushed and that these flushes should also be documented. We highlighted this to staff on the day and were assured that this would be implemented.The provider arranged after the inspection to have the dead legs removed.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.