Woodfield Medical Centre

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 people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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.

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 service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The service had contracts to ensure the premises was maintained. Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed all risks. For example, there was a risk assessment in place for the safe storage and use of liquid nitrogen used for cryotherapy and appropriate safety equipment had been provided. Staff responsible for storage of liquid nitrogen had received training and their competency had been assessed by a GP.

Staff training in health and safety including fire safety and moving and handling was provided and monitored to ensure completion.

The service had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

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.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses and a paramedic. Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence. The practice had developed a practice progression and development pathway, and staff were encouraged to progress their career and were supported by the practice to gain professional qualifications relevant to their role. For example, managers were encouraged and supported to undertake level 5 management qualifications and staff in these roles had completed this qualification or were in the process of completing this. A detailed skills and competency pathway had been developed to enable reception staff to develop within their role, staff were supported in their learning and signed off for each task as they felt and were assessed as competent. Clinical team competencies were also assessed, and staff were observed and signed off as competent in areas such as wound and pressure ulcer care. All staff spoken with were very motivated, knowledgeable and happy working at the practice.

The practice was a certified training facility for doctors specialising in general practice. They supported doctors in various stages of training, including GP Registrars, Foundation Year 2 doctors, and Year 5 students from the Hull York Medical School (HYMS). The practice held clinical learning sessions four times per year, provided by a tutor from HYMS, which was accessible to all clinical staff. The clinicians said these sessions were very valuable to their learning and development.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and a criminal records check.

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.

During our onsite visit, the service's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. The service’s infection prevention and control (IPC) lead and IPC link nurses within the practice conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and took action where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. The practice had scored 99% in an annual assessment undertaken by the local infection and prevention team in August 2025. Staff had completed relevant training in infection prevention and control.

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