Branch End Surgery

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 staff protected people from avoidable harm and made sure care was delivered from environments that were clean and well maintained. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 72 (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. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Staff told us they had a regular team who they called upon to address any environmental issues or carry out necessary repairs.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed risks. The practice operated from both ground and first-floor clinic rooms, with no lift access available. To ensure patients with mobility needs could access services, clinicians working in first-floor rooms arranged for appointments to be moved to a suitable ground-floor room when required.

The provider had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how it should continue to operate in the event of disruption. Its effectiveness was tested in 2024 when the practice experienced power outages. Following this, staff received face-to-face training to improve their understanding of business continuity processes and their roles during incidents. Staff reported that during more recent power outages they felt more confident and prepared, enabling the practice to maintain service provision with minimal disruption.

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.

The provider employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses, health care assistants and pharmacists. 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 provider 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. However, it was noted that oversight of administrative staff immunisations had not been in place. The issue was rectified quickly. Immunisation records for all administrative staff were requested, collated and reviewed, and a formal process was introduced to ensure any gaps in immunisation status were identified and addressed in a timely manner.

The practice is a training practice for post graduate doctors and medical students.

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

The provider had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. The provider demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements.

During our onsite visit, the provider 's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. The provider’s infection prevention and control lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to monitor compliance and took action to mitigate any identified risks. In addition, the provider had undertaken an external IPC audit, which included face-to-face training for staff. The practice team had also completed relevant online IPC training to support their knowledge and understanding of infection prevention and control requirements.

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