Snaith and Rawcliffe Medical Group

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 practice 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 contracts to ensure the premises was maintained.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed potential risks. We saw that all policies were regularly reviewed and changes were made when required. For example, due to the practice being a training practice for medical students it was identified that reception staff were not always aware of which students would be on site. A board was created for students to add their name to when they arrived. This ensured that staff were aware of who was on site in the event of a fire alarm being activated.

The practice had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption. There was appropriate signage in place for medical gases.

The practice 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.

The practice employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses, physiotherapists and pharmacists. The service regularly reviewed what the demand for services was so that they could plan accordingly. A review showed that the practice had managed to recruit above the required number for both doctors and practice nurses to ensure they could meet the level of demand needed for their patients. We saw examples across the administration workforce that they were able to perform dual roles. The practice also supported GP registrars and medical students in training.

Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence. A review of the mandatory training completed by staff showed that although members of the nursing team had completed their mandatory training it was not always clear to see when this had been completed. This was immediately rectified by the practice management team.

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

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

The practice had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. The service demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements. During our onsite visit at the main site and the branch site, the service's premises and a sample of equipment was reviewed and noted to be visibly clean. We reviewed 4 GP rooms and 2 nurses rooms across both sites.

The practice’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. 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.