The Bell Surgery Also known as Dr Chris Langley & partners

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 people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm and made sure care was delivered from environments that were safe, clean and well maintained. At our last inspection, we rated this key question as Good. At this inspection, 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.

Staff detected and controlled potential risks across the practice. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Whilst all staff were responsible for health and safety, the practice manager was the designated lead for managing the premises and estates. They held comprehensive records of environmental safety checks and associated risk assessments. This included various timetables for scheduling checks and risk assessments.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed all risks. There was a business continuity plan, known within the practice as the disaster recovery plan, which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the practice should continue to operate in the event of disruption.

The practice made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. Despite working in different roles and different teams, staff told us they worked as a team cohesively to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The practice employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses, pharmacists, care coordinators and a social prescriber. Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence.

The practice followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and a criminal records check.

As a training practice, 2 GP trainers supported trainee doctors, who were completing various stages of their training at the practice. We saw trainee doctors had daily debrief sessions, extended appointments and access to a senior GP, usually the Duty Doctor or a GP trainer throughout the day for support.

Staff detected, assessed and managed the risk of infection within all areas of the practice and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Changes had recently been made into how the practice governed and managed infection prevention and control (IPC), this included combined audits, check lists and policies to manage IPC.

The practice had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the facilities and equipment. Leaders demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements. Our inspection included a visit, during which the premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. One of the practice nurses had recently been assigned the lead for IPC, they had additional IPC training scheduled and had commenced risk assessments, reviews and audits to ensure compliance and took action where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. The last IPC audit was completed across June and July 2026. Staff had completed relevant training in infection prevention and control.

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