Lindley Group Practice

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 and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. We found a breach of legal regulation in relation to good governance and have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns identified.

This service scored 62 (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.

The provider did not have adequate systems and processes to support good governance. They did not act appropriately on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes.

We identified gaps in the effective oversight of processes including staff training, recruitment, infection prevention and control, and premises-related health and safety risk management. Several issues identified during the previous assessment had not been appropriately addressed or actioned. Following our feedback after this assessment, the provider had taken steps to address some of these concerns. However, further work was needed to resolve all the issues, and to ensure improvements were fully implemented and embedded within the service.

All staff we spoke with were clear about their individual roles and responsibilities. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. Leaders held regular meetings with staff and recorded actions that arose from these meetings.

Staff took confidentiality and information security seriously. Information governance training formed part of the provider’s mandatory training requirements, however not all staff were up to date with this training.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. For example, they told us about the ways in which they worked with their primary care network and local pharmacy.

The provider gathered patient feedback from the National GP Patient Survey, Friends and Family Test, complaints and compliments.

At the previous assessment in September 2025, we found that the Patient Participation Group (PPG) had not formally met since 2023. The provider told us at the time that they planned to reconvene meetings in the new year. However, at this assessment we found that PPG members had not been contacted by the provider and meetings had not resumed. Feedback from the PPG continued to echo the frustrations and challenges highlighted by the provider regarding the space limitations of the premises.

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.