Camrose, Gillies and Hackwood Partnership

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At this assessment, we inspected against one quality statement, Governance, management and sustainability.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remained good. The service was in breach of the legal regulations in relation to notifying CQC of events that stopped a service running safely and properly.

This service scored 71 (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 Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Leaders and staff told us about the challenges the practice had experienced since their new online appointment system became live as of the 19 November 2024.They also described the action they were taking to improve people’s access to appointments. However, there was a delay when leaders deployed contingency plans when the online appointment system was switched of between 30 September 2024 and 19 November 2024 . Although contingency plans were in place, some people informed us that information was unclear on how people could access services during this period. This resulted in people not receiving the right information at the right time and therefore not being able to promptly access care when needed. Senior managers recognised their implementation of support during this time was not as good as it should have been. When online access systems had been made unavailable for people to submit urgent or routine requests, the practice failed to notify CQC that this systems failure had or may stop the service running safely or properly to enable CQC to take follow-up action. Following this incident the practice’s contingency plan had been reviewed however effective processes need to be in place should a similar incident occur. We found examples where leaders’ oversight had been effective. Staff told us they could access all required policies and procedures and managers held regular practice meetings with staff, which discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. Staff demonstrated awareness of practice auditing processes in relation to medicine monitoring and patient safety searches were completed routinely in line with practice policy.
 

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.