- GP practice
Goodheart Surgery
Report from 19 December 2024 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 13 May 2025 to 21 May 2025. Goodheart Surgery is a GP practice and delivers services to 6,401 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 97% of the practice patient list is white, 0.82% Asian, 0.81% Black, 1.27% Mixed and 0.51% other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the first decile (1 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.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and most risks had been mitigated. 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 mostly managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. However, there were areas for improvement relating to recruitment, recording clinical supervision, identification and management of infection prevention and control (IPC) risks, monitoring and recording medicines fridge temperatures, authorisation of patient group directions (PGDs) and ensuring patients were aware of the risks of their prescribed medicines. The provider addressed these concerns immediately.
People 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 people understood their care and treatment to enable
them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people who took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity. However, there were areas for improvement in relation to coding patients records effectively, assessment records for patients with asthma prescribed steroids and do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) records. The provider made immediate improvements to address these areas.
People were treated with exceptional kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing. All the staff told us they were valued by leaders and all staff were very positive about the support they received and the positive work environment.
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. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People 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, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. 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.
People's experience of this service
People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Recent survey results, including from the National GP Patient Survey showed people were satisfied with the services provided and satisfaction was above expected for involvement in decisions, being treated with care and concern and being listened to. There was a cross-practice patient participation group (PPG) which was operated by the Primary Care Network (PCN) which the practice was part of. This PPG was in the process being transferred back to each individual practice. A representative from the PPG told us they hadn’t attended a meeting for a while, but the provider had previously been good at sharing information with the PPG.
Feedback from patients shared with CQC was mostly positive particularly in respect of the lead GP who was praised for their compassion, listening to patients and thoroughness in health assessments. Staff were praised for their kindness and caring attitude.