Whenever the Standards change, practices understandably ask what they need to do differently. Which requirements have changed? What evidence will be needed? How will the team find time to prepare?
Those questions deserve clear answers. But as we prepare for the 6th edition, we should also ask what that work will achieve. Will it help practices deliver safer care, strengthen their systems and make the daily work of general practice more reliable?
Accreditation and improvement belong together
Accreditation provides assurance that a practice meets defined standards. Its value also lies in helping teams identify risks, understand their strengths and make meaningful improvements.
A policy explains how a process should work. What matters is whether it is implemented consistently, people understand their responsibilities and weaknesses are addressed.
Evidence should demonstrate that connection between an agreed process and everyday care. Otherwise, we risk putting on a show of quality without delivering it.
Make the effort count
General practice teams have limited time. Accreditation preparation sits alongside patient care, workforce pressures and running a business.
Every improvement activity should therefore have a clear purpose: what problem are we addressing, and how will we know whether the change helps?
Clearer responsibilities can reduce missed tasks. Reviewing follow-up systems can reveal where information is being lost. Testing emergency procedures can expose gaps before they matter most.
Stronger systems also offer business advantages: less duplication, more consistent workflows, clearer accountability and less reliance on individuals to keep everything moving. They can give owners and managers greater confidence in how their practice operates.
These benefits make quality an everyday business advantage.
Quality needs the whole practice
Quality becomes fragile when one person carries the knowledge, maintains the evidence and notices every gap.
Clinicians, nurses, reception staff, managers and owners each see different parts of the practice. Their experience can reveal where processes become difficult and what would help.
Involving them builds shared understanding and makes improvements easier to sustain. It also reduces dependence on one person holding everything together.
Accrediting agencies must contribute value
Practices should engage thoughtfully with accreditation. Accrediting agencies like QPA must make that engagement worthwhile.
We need to explain requirements clearly and provide constructive, specific feedback that reflects the practice’s circumstances.
We should examine our own contribution: did we clarify a risk, help resolve uncertainty or support an improvement the team could sustain?
Practices are entitled to ask those questions of their accreditation provider.
Look beyond survey day
The 6th edition offers an opportunity to strengthen the connection between assessment, learning and improvement.
Good accreditation should leave a practice with greater understanding of its systems, a clearer path to safer care and the business benefits of working more efficiently.
The measure is what happens every day: how confidently people fulfil their responsibilities, how consistently systems work and how effectively the team responds to change.
That is lasting value worth working towards.