- GP practice
Dr GS Chana's Practice Also known as The Yiewsley Family Practice
Assessment report published 20 October 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 17/09/2025 to 18/09/2025. Dr GS Chana’s Practice also known as Yiewsley Family Practice is a GP practice and delivers service to 16,700 patients under a GMS contract held with NHS England. The practice is based in Yiewsley a large suburban village in the London Borough of Hillingdon. The practice is 1 of 5 GP practices in the Colne Union primary care network (PCN) and is also part of the Hillingdon Confederation Community Interest Company (CIC) which is owned by the 42 practices across the London Borough of Hillingdon. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnicity of the practice population is 51% White, 29% Asian, 10% Black, 5% Mixed and 5% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the fourth decile (4 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. 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. This was a comprehensive assessment carried out because of the length of time since our last assessment of the service.
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 training and 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. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have 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.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. 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. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable 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. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.
People's experience of this service
Recent survey results, including from the National GP Patient Survey and the NHS Friends and Family Test, showed mixed feedback about the service. For example, Friends and Family Test results from January 2025 showed that out of 1,808 responses, 1,378 people rated the practice as good or very good, 189 were neutral and 241 people rated the practice as poor, very poor or didn’t know. National GP Patient Survey results from July 2025 showed that the practice was performing below average for patients being treated with care and concern and being listened to by the healthcare professional. People we spoke to were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. We spoke to 1 member of the PPG. They told us that staff were kind and professional and that access was satisfactory. They told us that the PPG met with the practice every 6 months and that the practice listened to them and took account their views. We spoke to 4 patients during our inspection all of whom praised the service and staff. They told us that access was very good and that the digital triage system was easy to use. They told us that staff always treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.