- GP practice
Sandy Lane Surgery
Assessment report published 3 February 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 8 January 2026 to 15 January 2026. Sandy Lane Surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to approximately 8,913 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The National General Practice Profiles states that that the patient ethnicity profile is made up of 97% White, 1.2% Asian, 0.4% Black,1.2% Mixed and 0.2% Other. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group in the 6 decile (6 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
Under our previous methodology at the last inspection in July 2023, the practice was rated requires improvement overall, requires improvement for providing safe and responsive services and rated good for providing effective, caring and well-led services. This announced assessment was carried outto follow-up on the breach identified at our last inspection in relation to safe care and treatment. The service has now been rated good overall, and good for providing safe, effective, responsive, caring and well-led services.
SAFE: The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly and carried out an annual analysis of incidents and complaints to drive learning and improvement. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff were recruited safely, received training and regular appraisals. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. Improvements had been made to ensure people received a safe service.
EFFECTIVE: People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. The practice did not always meet National targets clinical expectations relating to screening and immunisations. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.
CARING: People were mostly treated with kindness and compassion. The National GP Patient Survey results for the practice showed 74% of respondents stated the healthcare professional was good at treating them with care and concern and 72% found the reception and administrative team helpful during their last appointment. Staff shared examples of how they promoted privacy and dignity in their work. They treated people as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. Leaders supported staff wellbeing.
RESPONSIVE: People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care. Access to the service had improved.
WELL-LED: Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.
Since the last inspection, the practice had made improvements and is no longer in breach of regulations.
People's experience of this service
Patient experience was mixed. The National GP Patient Survey 2025 results for the practice showed people were not always satisfied with the service they received with all but 3 indicators below local and national averages. However, results from the practice own patient survey and NHS Friends and Family Test, showed people were satisfied with services with the majority of respondents stating they would recommend the GP practice to their friends and family. Doctors were described as very helpful, some could be rude but most were lovely. Receptionists were described as polite, friendly, kind and helpful. The practice had an active and established patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. The PPG Chair spoke highly of the service provided and the positive changes made following patient feedback. A care home representative told us the service was both accessible and responsive, with appointments arranged in a timely manner and appropriate flexibility shown to meet their resident’s needs. They told us the practice staff were kind, caring, attentive, good listeners and involved people in decisions about their care.