The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Crondall New Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Redlands Lane, Crondall, Farnham, Surrey, GU10 5RF (01252) 850292

Provided and run by:
Crondall New Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Crondall New Surgery on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Crondall New Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

22 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Crondall New Surgery on 22 August 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

10 April 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection October 2014 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Crondall New Surgery on 10 April 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • The practice had introduced a children’s version of their friends and family test to capture feedback from this population group.
  • There were policies and procedures in place for most topics however not all policies had been reviewed recently and the Information Governance policy was not available on the day of the inspection.
  • Oversight of recording of staff training had been delegated to leaders of each team. Recording was inconsistent depending upon who the allocated lead was.
  • Complaints were handled satisfactorily however there was not an overview of the learning from the complaints to share with staff.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Consider ways to improve non-clinical staff awareness around Sepsis.
  • Review the programme for updating policies and the availability of policies for staff.
  • Review processes in place for receipt of Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency alerts and how these are shared with staff.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

15th October 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Crondall New Surgery on 15 October 2014.

Overall the practice is rated as good. Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for all population groups.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment. Information was provided to help patients understand the care available to them.
  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider SHOULD:

  • Review the level of detail recorded in the Controlled Drugs register of who collected the Controlled Drugs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice