Green Man 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 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 69 (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 leased the premises and was responsible for the maintenance. The facilities and equipment were clean, well maintained, and suitable for service delivery, with appropriate risk assessments and maintenance contracts in place. Staff identified and managed environmental risks effectively. Ten out of 16 staff had completed annual fire safety training.

A business continuity plan was in place and reviewed to ensure service resilience during disruptions.

Many of the staff had been employed by the practice for many years. We reviewed two staff files where staff were recruited in the last three years and found further work was required to demonstrate the practice held all the appropriate documentation to demonstrate full oversight of safe recruitment. In addition, on the day of the site visit where staff worked as a locum or were employed by the local primary care network, the practice required further assurance they were correctly recruited for their roles. Following the assessment the provider responded and submitted the appropriate documentation to demonstrate assurance.

Some clinical and non-clinical staff had not completed mandatory training. This included 4 non-clinical staff and 1 clinical staff member who had not completed adult and child safeguarding training, and 5 non-clinical staff who had not completed accessible information standard, and fire safety training. The practice manager advised that staffing shortages and difficulties recruiting to vacant posts may have contributed to these gaps in training compliance.

The practice manager explained clinical staff were supervised by the partners, and most staff had completed an annual appraisal.

controlled potential spread, sharing concerns with relevant agencies. During the onsite visit, the practice premises and sampled equipment were observed to be visibly clean. A designated infection prevention and control lead was in place. Although cleaning schedules were in place, at the time of the site visit there was no evidence they had been followed in the last 2 months. In addition, the control of substances hazardous to health risk assessments were available online but at the time of the assessment the cleaner did not have access to online documents. Following the site visit the cleaner was given access to paper documents. Six-monthly risk assessments were completed to reduce risks. At the time of the assessment examples of the identified issues were the replacement of taps in a consultation room and some of the rooms skirting boards, which the practice manager agreed to respond to.

Out of 16 staff 11 had completed their infection prevention and control training.

The practice manager had monitored staff immunisations according to the green book, but where a member of staff had declined a vaccine, they had not put a risk assessment in place. The provider completed the appropriate risk assessments following the site visit.

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