- GP practice
The Vale Surgery
Assessment report published 2 July 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 18 May 2026 to 21 May 2026. The Vale surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to approximately 10,578 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that 46.7% people are White, 18.5% are Asian, 21.9% are Black, 7.3% Mixed and 5.7% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 5 decile (5 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. We have decided to carry out a comprehensive assessment as it has been 7 years since our last site visit.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 any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.
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. However, staff, including clinicians, did not demonstrate sufficient understanding and application of legislation relating to mental capacity.
People were treated with 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.
The service provided information people could understand, and people knew how to give feedback. 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.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening and trust. Leaders were visible 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. Improvements were required in the governance systems. We found concerns with administrative oversight of daily practice schedules which included some gaps in the system to monitor staff training, safe recruitment procedures and building maintenance such as completion of action plans recommended from risk assessments.
We found breaches of regulation in relation to need for consent (Regulation 11) and good governance (Regulation 17). We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
People expressed mixed views about the quality of their care and treatment. Patient experience of the service, as reflected in the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, was generally lower than local and national averages with a 15% response rate. For instance, 30% of patients reported it was easy to get through to this GP practice by phone, compared with local and national averages of 53% and 53%. In addition, 54% described their experience of contacting their GP practice as good, compared the average locally and nationally of 68% and 70%.
There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. Representatives from the PPG described how managers made positive changes because of feedback, such as the triage system.
Feedback received by Care Quality Commission (CQC) through the give feedback on care experience online forms was positive. However, there was negative feedback in relation to access in getting appointments.