Walford Mill Medical 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 had contracts to ensure the premises were maintained. For example, the service maintained gas and boiler annual servicing, and electrical safety was undertaken 5 yearly, in line with national guidelines.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed all risks.For example, the service had carried out a fire risk assessment in July 2026. Actions had been taken to ensure the premises was safe and complied with national legislation. During our onsite visit, we noted regular fire drills were being undertaken and fire extinguisher servicing was undertaken annually in line with service policy.

Medical equipment was calibrated annually in line with manufacturers' recommendations. Portable appliances were tested on an annual basis. This demonstrated that the service had systems in place to ensure equipment was safe, fit for purpose, and maintained appropriately.

The service had retained and stored all Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) risk assessments for all cleaning products stocked, alongside relevant Safety Data Sheets (SDS).

Hallways and corridors were noted to be tidy and free from clutter. Staff offices were kept secure, and access to staff-only areas were restricted from the public.

The service had 2 wheelchairs available for people to use. The service had appropriate risk assessments, safe use protocols and maintenance records for both wheelchairs to ensure they were safe for people to use.

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 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, paramedics and pharmacists. The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. During our onsite visit, we reviewed 3 staff files and observed recruitment checks had been completed for all 3 staff members, and records were maintained accurately. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. Records of vaccinations were stored within staff files.

Staff received a formal induction relevant to their role and responsibilities. Clinical staff we spoke to confirmed they attended supervision sessions where they could discuss complex cases and prescribing. Staff were also supported through regular check ins and ongoing appraisals.

Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training, which the service had deemed mandatory, and operated within their agreed areas of competence. There were systems to monitor staff training compliance, and we noted all staff had completed mandatory training in line with service policy. Staff we spoke with confirmed they felt supported in their roles and had received appropriate training for their responsibilities.

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 service had a designated infection prevention and control (IPC) lead, and staff were aware of who this was and how to raise concerns.

The service 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, the service's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. The service’s IPC lead conducted regular risk assessments and audits to ensure compliance and took action where necessary to mitigate any identified risks. During our onsite visit, we noted these included legionella risk assessments and water temperature testing, which demonstrated water temperatures were monitored to prevent the growth of legionella bacteria in line with national guidelines. Staff had completed relevant IPC training.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) was appropriately stocked, and accessible. Spillage kits were available if needed and staff knew where relevant IPC equipment was stored.

Clinical waste arrangements were effective to ensure the safe storage and appropriate labelling of clinical waste in line with IPC national guidelines.

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