Cricklade Surgery

Ratings

• Overall

  Inadequate

• Safe

  Inadequate

• Effective

  Requires improvement

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Inadequate

Our view of the service

Date of Assessment: 5 December to 9 December 2025.

Cricklade Surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to 3,400 people under a contract held with NHS England. The service also has a branch site at Ashton Keynes Village Hall.

The National General Practice Profiles states the service has a higher-than-average number of people aged over 50. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation in the service’s population group is in the 9th decile (9 out of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the 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.

The assessment focused on the safe, effective and well-led key questions. We undertook this assessment in response to information we held about the service.

The premises were clean and well maintained. However, the service did not always have effective processes or policies in place to mitigate potential risks relating to health and safety and fire safety. This included not having appropriately trained fire marshals or a designated health and safety lead.

The service had a designated infection prevention and control (IPC) lead, but some elements of responsibilities and policies were not in place. However, the IPC lead was newly appointed and was working on bringing the service in line with recommended guidance.

Staff recruitment files did not meet the full requirements of Schedule 3 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. There was also insufficient oversight of recruitment checks, supervision processes, mandatory training compliance and prescribing audits.

Whilst people were involved in assessments of their needs, and staff supported them to understand their care and treatment, the service was not following national guidance in relation to monitoring long-term conditions. While no evidence of harm was found, the service’s recall systems were not fully effective. There were also delays in reviewing test results and clinical documentation, placing people at risk of harm.

However, staff made sure people understood their care and treatment so they could give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and made decisions in people’s best interests when they did not have capacity.

There was not an effective system to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service. This included insufficient assurance that incidents, complaints and significant events were investigated thoroughly. As a result, learning and required actions were not always completed.

Leaders and staff did not always share a clear vision or culture based on listening, learning and trust. Staff told us leaders were not always visible, knowledgeable or supportive, and some reported they did not feel confident to provide feedback. While some staff were able to demonstrate an understanding of their roles and responsibilities, this was not consistent across the workforce.
We identified 4 breaches of the legal regulations relating to safe care and treatment; good governance, staffing, and fit and proper persons employed. In instances where CQC has decided to take civil enforcement action against the provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded. We have also asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

People's experience of this service

People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Survey results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, showed high levels of satisfaction. While people expressed satisfaction with their care and treatment, our inspection found elements of care that did not meet the expected standards.

The service told us there was an active patient participation group (PPG) representing the views of people using the service, but they were unable to demonstrate how leaders had made positive changes as a result of feedback.