Greenbank 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 detected and controlled potential risks in the environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. A range of contracts were in place to ensure the premises were maintained appropriately.

The service was located in an adapted building. All required aids, adaptations and facilities were in place to ensure the premises were fully accessible for all people.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and audits. Health and safety related policies and procedures were in place. Staff had been provided with training in health and safety related topics such as fire safety, infection control and manual handling. Staff told us they had no concerns with the arrangements in place for ensuring health and safety. There was a business continuity plan in place to provide guidance for dealing with a major disruption to the service, for example, an IT failure.

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, pharmacists, social prescribers and care co-ordinators. Most staff had completed training appropriate and relevant to their role, but not all clinical and non-clinical staff had completed all mandatory training in a timely way, and the process for ensuring staff completed refresher training was not effective. We discussed this during our assessment, and the provider were responsive to our feedback.

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 a criminal records check.

Staff told us there were enough staff to provide safe, high-quality care and they worked effectively as a team. There were appropriate arrangements in place for covering sickness, absence and vacancies and the use of temporary staff was minimal.

Leaders told us there was protected learning time to undertake training and professional development and that staff received training appropriate and relevant to their role.

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 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 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.