Dunsville 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 69 (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.

Dunsville Medical Centre 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 in place to ensure the premises was well maintained. Staff and leaders had completed health and safety risk assessments and undertaken audits to ensure they had identified and addressed any potential risks. Portable appliance testing and calibration of equipment were up to date, and regular fire safety checks were conducted.

The provider had a business continuity plan which had been recently reviewed and outlined how they would continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

Staff we spoke to on the day of our visit confirmed that they had all the equipment required to undertake their role safely and effectively. They also confirmed that they were satisfied with the health and safety arrangements at the practice.

However, it was noted during our visit that, although hazardous substances were stored securely, there was no appropriate signage on the cleaning cupboard. Also, the provider was not displaying a Health Safety Law Poster or an Employers’ Liability Insurance certificate, as required by national guidelines.

The Practice Manager took immediate steps to address the above issues however when they were highlighted to them.

Staff at Dunsville Medical Centre worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. The service did not always make sure there were enough qualified, skilled, and experienced staff however, and did not always make sure staff received effective support, supervision, and development.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, Advanced Nurse Practitioners, nurses, and health care assistants, and staff operated within their agreed areas of competence.

Completion rates for some training which the service had deemed mandatory were good and most staff for example had completed safeguarding training, fire safety training, health and safety training and Autism and Learning Disability training.

Other mandatory training however was not up to date. The provider was aware of this and were taking steps to address it. There was a system in place for monitoring training and Basic Life Support training and Infection Prevention and Control training were scheduled for September 2026. Staff we spoke to during our visit confirmed that they were given protected time for learning and development and that they were provided with enough guidance, policies, and procedures to perform their role.

Staff also told us that appraisals and performance reviews had not been completed regularly and that some had not received an appraisal for a considerable period. This was in the process of being addressed and the provider had scheduled in review and appraisal meetings for the coming months.

A review of recent recruitment showed that the service was following safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, a review of qualifications, obtaining professional references and a criminal records check.

However, records were checked for two staff members who were recruited in 2022 and 2024 and the provider could not evidence that safe recruitment procedures had been followed for them – in both cases there was no record of references or a full employment history being sought and in one case, no proof of identity was held on file.

Dunsville Medical Centre 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 had conducted a recent risk assessment and audits to ensure compliance and acted where necessary to mitigate any identified risks.

Annual IPC training was mandatory for all staff, and most staff had completed it. For those who had not, completion was being monitored.

Staff we spoke to on the day of our visit confirmed that they felt that infection and control arrangements at the practice were sufficient to protect both them and patients and that they knew who the IPC Lead was.

However, it was noted during our visit that some single use items (compression bandages and syringes) and some hydration gel and emollient lotion were found in consultation rooms which were out of date. These were immediately removed by the practice nurse.

Also, although we were informed that the provider maintained a record of staff vaccinations, this could not be evidenced during the visit.

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