• Doctor
  • GP practice

Northfields Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

61 Northfield Avenue, Ealing, London, W13 9QP (020) 8567 1612

Provided and run by:
Northfields Surgery

Assessment report published 26 August 2025

On this page

Well-led

Good

11 August 2025

We looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as requires improvement. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance because of shortfalls relating to staff recruitment and training, monitoring of paper prescriptions and patient safety alerts. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good as we found sufficient improvements had been made in these areas.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Shared direction and culture

Score: 3

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

All staff had contributed to the development of the practice vision and strategy, which was kept under review. The practice was aware of the projected increase in the local population and was working with partner agencies to address future challenges.

Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders

Score: 3

The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff told us leaders in the practice was approachable and responded to any concerns raised. Staff also told us leaders modelled the values of the practice. We saw the leadership team worked with other practices in the primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area.

Freedom to speak up

Score: 2

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

However, the practice did not have well established Freedom to Speak up arrangements. Although, staff were aware of how to raise concerns within the service, they were not aware of external contacts.

Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion

Score: 3

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them.

Policies and procedures to promote diversity and equality were in place. We saw senior leaders had addressed concerns related to discrimination. Adjustments had been made to ensure all staff were valued, for example we saw adjustments to support disabled staff were in place.

Governance, management and sustainability

Score: 2

The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. The provider had established governance processes that were appropriate for their service. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. However, some policies were generic and not tailored to the practice. Also, the business continuity plan did not specify a buddy practice. Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. Managers clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously.

Partnerships and communities

Score: 3

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The provider worked with other practices within their primary care network to offer extended access, and flu and covid vaccination programmes. Staff had made adjustments to improve coordination of their service with community healthcare services, including through recently established weekly meetings centred on the care of those at higher risk of hospital admission.

Learning, improvement and innovation

Score: 3

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

The practice had a quality improvement plan in place to help drive improvements in services. This focussed on access and improving clinical outcomes.