Dr James Lawrie

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 75 (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 service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The service had a version controlled business continuity plan that was regularly reviewed and set out how the service would continue to operate safely in the event of a disruption. Staff described using “downtime forms” in case of electrical or IT failure.

The premises were owned by NHS Property Services, with appropriate contracts in place to ensure they were safe and well maintained. Leaders had oversight of actions arising from maintenance work and monitored their completion. The service had annual arrangements in place for portable appliance testing by a certified external engineer. Equipment was labelled following testing and replaced immediately if it failed. Weighing scales, blood pressure monitors and the auroscope were calibrated at regular intervals. Emergency equipment was checked daily, and monthly IPC room audits covered equipment alongside cleanliness.

Relevant safety alerts were received and shared by two responsible individuals by email and discussed at Tuesday clinical meetings. We were told that the recalled equipment was removed immediately, and the actions taken were documented.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and carried out audits to ensure risks were identified, managed and mitigated. The service also had current fire safety systems and protocols in place, supported by documented evidence of regular testing and fire drill records. The building was secured, with access restricted where appropriate.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The service had a version controlled recruitment policy in place and employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses, healthcare assistants and receptionists. Leaders explained how staffing levels and skill mix were reviewed to ensure people received consistently safe, good-quality care.

We reviewed a workforce risk assessment and action plan summary. Leaders described how staff performance concerns were identified and addressed, with formal performance management procedures used where necessary.

Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory. All mandatory training certificates in the random sample reviewed were in date. The service was an accredited training practice, and we reviewed its current accreditation certificate.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. All 5 HR records reviewed contained identity checks, qualifications, professional references, professional registration where applicable, and criminal-records checks. All 5 also contained completed, up-to-date appraisal forms. Staff confirmed they completed an induction before working independently. Staff told us they had access to clinical supervision and support whenever required, including from GPs, however, these arrangements were not documented. GPs received supervision through weekly peer-support debriefs.

However, the service could not demonstrate a documented competency framework for clinical and care staff before they worked independently, or a formal process for the internal clinical supervision of nurses and healthcare assistants. We did not identify any patient harm or immediate risk arising from these gaps. Leaders acknowledged the findings and introduced a documented supervision process during the assessment.

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

The service had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. However, they could not demonstrate documented equipment-cleaning or stock-expiry checks in any of the 5 clinical rooms viewed. This limited its assurance that these checks were completed consistently.

The service monitored and maintained oversight of cleaning arrangements and had clinical staff conducting daily random spot-checks. During our onsite visit, the service's premises and the equipment viewed were visibly clean. Unused equipment had green “clean” stickers applied for cleanliness oversight.

The service’s infection prevention and control lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and took action where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. We reviewed the 2026 annual audit report that showed a record of full compliance. However, this was inconsistent with the absence of documented equipment-cleaning and stock-expiry checks in all 5 clinical rooms viewed.

Staff had completed relevant training in infection prevention and control.

The staff immunisation log showed that immunisation status was monitored.

We reviewed the practice’s 2026 Waste Management Policy. Waste bins were changed daily or as needed, sharps bins were correctly labelled, and the external storage area was maintained in line with guidance. The practice nurse and healthcare assistant gave consistent accounts of how specimens were labelled, stored securely and handed to the courier, in line with guidance.

We were told that suspected notifiable diseases were escalated to the duty doctor on the same day, who completed the online notification.

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