Harrow Road GP Practice, Triangle House Health Centre

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

During the inspection we assessed four quality statements in the well-led key question. At our last inspection we rated the practice good for providing well-led services. Following this inspection the practice remains rated good in this area.

We found that governance processes were effective, staff felt supported by leaders who were visible and approachable. The provider had systems to manage current and future performance and risks to the quality of the service and had taken steps to make service improvements.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Leaders told us they had an open-door policy, and staff feedback was that leaders were approachable. Staff said if they had any concerns, they felt safe to raise them and would be listened to. When patients were affected by things that went wrong, they were given an apology and informed of any resulting action.

Staff said that leaders listened and were approachable, felt safe raising concerns, and enjoyed working in a friendly environment.

The leaders had the experience, capacity, capability, and integrity to ensure that the practice’s vision could be delivered.

Due to the processes in place, leaders were aware of issues outside their direct line of responsibility. The practice had policies and procedures which supported the learning culture. The practice offered apologies to people, learned lessons from individual concerns and complaints, and took action to improve the quality of care. Staff had clear roles and responsibilities and were flexible to meet patients' needs.

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.

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

People from the patient participation group (PPG) told us they were involved in developing the practice and suggesting improvements. For example, the PPG suggested introducing a callback feature on the practice's telephone lines to give patients the choice of waiting for their call to be answered or receiving a call back from the practice, which the practice introduced.

We found staff and leaders were open and transparent, and they told us they collaborated with all relevant external stakeholders and agencies.

Staff and leaders engaged with people and partners to share learning with each other, which resulted in continuous improvements to the service, such as attending primary care network (a structure which brings general practitioners together on an area basis) meetings and participating in local community activities. They used these networks to identify new or innovative ideas that could improve patient outcomes.

We saw evidence of the practice leaders working in partnership with key organisations to share learning that resulted in continuous improvements to the service. They used networks to identify new ideas that could lead to better outcomes for people. The practice had effective working relationships with its primary care network and used additional staff through the additional roles reimbursement scheme to improve patients' access to care.

The practice had a learning culture in which staff and leaders actively participated. Staff talked positively about their experiences of joining the practice, moving to new roles, and receiving ongoing support and development.

Leaders informed us that they benchmark their performance with the other practices within the primary care network and meet quarterly with their PPG.

We observed evidence of shared learning and staff involvement at all levels. Leaders regularly reviewed the practice assurance systems. The clinical audits and quality improvement processes positively impacted the quality of the service.

The practice had an effective process to manage medicines safety alerts from the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). There were transparent processes for monitoring the stock of emergency medicines and equipment, and our observations confirmed that the provider was following the correct processes. The practice had a system to allow people to speak up when they had concerns, underpinned by a policy. The staff we spoke to knew of the process and felt confident raising concerns if necessary.

The leadership team managed clinical supervision and documented all supervision meetings. The practice had an established patient participation group. Feedback was positive. The group felt involved and listened to. They met regularly and were able to submit ideas.