York Road Surgery

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. 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 owned the premises, facilities and equipment were clean, well maintained, and suitable for service delivery, with appropriate risk assessments and maintenance contracts in place. Staff identified and managed environmental risks effectively. All staff had completed fire safety training.

A business continuity plan was in place and regularly reviewed to ensure service resilience during disruptions.

The practice followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which was in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, verification of qualifications, obtaining of professional references, confirmation of immunisation status and a criminal records check. Staff confirmed they received induction. However, at the time of the assessment the recruitment policy did not contain a list of the checks carried out to ensure staff were employed safely.

Leaders made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. At the time of the assessment the leaders had systems in place to demonstrate staff had the necessary skills, knowledge, and experience for their roles. Clinical and non-clinical staff had completed mandatory training and received an annual appraisal. Clinical staff had supervision and consultation discussions. However, we identified one member of staff who had not completed the required role-specific training, indicating that oversight of role-specific training needed improvement.

The staff effectively assessed and managed infection risks. They promptly identified and controlled potential spread, sharing concerns with relevant agencies. During the onsite visit, the practice premises and sampled equipment were observed to be visibly clean. A designated infection prevention and control lead was in place, and all staff had received appropriate training. Cleaning schedules were followed, and audits and risk assessments were completed annually with actions taken to reduce risks. Most staff had completed infection prevention and control training online.

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