Saddlers Health 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 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 premises was owned by a third party and was well maintained. There was a contract in place between the provider and the third party illustrating what the provider was responsible for. Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments where they were required and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed any risks. Where equipment needed calibration, these were carried out and Portable Appliance Testing (PAT) certificates were in place to confirm equipment was safe to use. There was a business continuity plan which was reviewed annually and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

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

There were a range of staff employed both clinical and non-clinical, which included G.Ps, a nurse, a health care assistant, administrative staff and staff employed by the Primary Care Network (PCN). We found there were mandatory training courses staff were required to complete. Records we saw showed that this was up to date as leaders monitored completion rates. The service had a recruitment process in place, which was in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. The service also had a process in place to ensure DBS checks were reviewed to ensure staff were still able to work with people to keep them safe.

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 premises owners were responsible for keeping the main areas of the building clean however, the service had processes in place to ensure areas they were responsible for were kept clean to reduce any risk to patients. The service demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements. During the onsite visit the premises and equipment we reviewed was visibly clean. The service’s infection prevention and control (IPC) lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and action was taken where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. Staff had completed relevant IPC training and knew who the IPC lead was.

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