Hampstead Group Practice

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 contracts to ensure the premises was maintained. The practice had a dedicated premises manager to maintain oversight of premises-related risks and health and safety requirements. Risk assessments, including assessments relating to fire safety and legionella, had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed. The practice carried out fire drills, fire safety risk assessments and fire alarm testing. The practice had also allocated staff as fire wardens who had undertaken additional training specifically tailored to their role. Documentation reviewed demonstrated that fire safety equipment was maintained and remedial actions had been completed where issues had been identified. The practice had systems in place for legionella monitoring, PAT testing and calibration of clinical equipment. Where concerns were identified through routine testing or calibration processes, appropriate action was taken to mitigate risks, including replacing defective equipment. The practice advised that a further Electrical Installation Condition Report (EICR) was being undertaken at the time of the assessment to review the electrical installation and identify any remedial works required. Where legionella bacteria were identified through routine water sampling undertaken in May 2026, the practice sought further advice, undertook additional testing, restricted the use of affected areas and implemented remedial action. The practice advised that remediation works were ongoing at the time of the assessment. The service had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption. The practice had arrangements in place for disruptions including arrangements with a neighbouring practice and backup phones and computers to support service continuity.

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.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses and healthcare assistants. We reviewed a sample of training and recruitment files for five members of staff and found training was mostly up to date. We identified that one member of staff’s Basic Life Support (BLS) training had expired the month before our assessment. Leaders told us the staff member had previously completed in-house BLS training and had already been booked onto the next face to face refresher course following and within the same month of our assessment. Leaders had taken action to ensure the training needs for the member of staff had been assessed and the staff member had completed an online BLS module in the interim. Staff told us they were encouraged to undertake further learning and development and were provided with protected learning time. Administrative staff described how they were trained across a range of roles and responsibilities, enabling them to support colleagues across different areas of practice. They told us this cross-cover arrangement helped maintain service delivery during busy periods and when staff were absent. The service 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 Disclosure and Barring Services (DBS) checks. For one member of staff, the practice was unable to locate a copy of their DBS certificate, however, leaders provided evidence of a DBS Update Service status check confirming the certificate remained current.

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.

Cleaning schedules were in place and followed. We observed clinical and non-clinical areas and observed the premises and equipment were visibly clean. Handwashing facilities were available throughout the practice with appropriate hand hygiene and infection prevention and control (IPC) information displayed for staff and patients. The practice had a designated IPC lead and staff had undertaken appropriate IPC training. The practice had an IPC policy in place and carried out audits and risk assessments relating to personal protective equipment (PPE), sharps management, hand hygiene and equipment. Staff were able to describe the escalation process for reporting notifiable diseases to the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA).

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