You are here

Giffords Partnership Good Also known as Giffords Surgery


Review carried out on 4 November 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Giffords Partnership on 4 November 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Giffords Partnership, you can give feedback on this service.

Review carried out on 22 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Giffords Partnership on 22 November 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

Inspection carried out on 01/11/2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Giffords Partnership on 1 November 2016.

Overall the practice is rated as good.


Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.

  • The practice had recently introduced a new triage system for appointments which meant patients could not usually make appointments in advance. Most patients we spoke to said it was a good system and an improvement on the previous arrangements.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.


We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had good facilities for the blind and partially sighted. Signage throughout the building was very clear and included a braille translation. The practice leaflet was available in a braille format and the practice was able to arrange the translation of any other of its documents into braille within 24 hours.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Ensure all staff interview notes and references are recorded and retained.

  • Ensure all staff have regular appraisals.

  • Ensure that all lessons learnt from significant events incidents are shared with appropriate staff.

  • Review their appointment system to ensure it does not disadvantage working patients and other who may need to book appointments in advance.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice