Belford Medical 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 72 (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 provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The provider had contracts to ensure the premises was maintained for the Belford Medical Practice site, whilst the branch site premises (Seahouses Practice) was owned by NHS Property Services. Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed risks. The practice had recently had an independent health and safety compliance audit which saw a generally satisfactory situation, but some actions were required, which leaders assured us were being addressed or had already been addressed. Issues that were raised included action logs and hazard report logs not being regularly reviewed or if they were, not being accurately documented. There were also similar concerns regarding fire and lone working risk assessments being kept up to date.

The provider had a business continuity plan which was reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

The provider 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 provider employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included 5 GPs, 1 clinical pharmacist, 1 nurse practitioner, 3 practice nurses, 1 health care assistant, practice manager, reception manager, dispensary manager and 7 administrative staff who cross-skilled as receptionists, dispensers or medical secretaries. Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the provider had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence. We identified that non-clinical staff were trained to level 1 for safeguarding adults and children. The provider told this was due to the lack of availability for in person training sessions. The latest guidance states all staff working in health care who have regular contact with patients, their families or carers, or the public should be trained to level 2. After the assessment, the provider told us that all non-clinical staff would complete level 2 safeguarding training for adults and children.

The provider 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 for all clinical staff. Non-clinical staff were not DBS checked as standard; some staff had worked at the practice before updated guidance had come into effect. Leaders told us they would ensure all staff would now retrospectively be DBS checked.

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

The provider had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the buildings (both the main site and the branch site) and its equipment. The provider demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements. During our onsite visit, the premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. The provider’s infection prevention and control lead (IPC) conducted quarterly 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. The IPC lead and practice leadership had taken the opportunity following an onsite training session to engage Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust to conduct an external IPC audit in September.

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