Dr Michael White - Lindfield

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 found this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Shared direction and culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

Systems and processes were embedded, and the inspection did not highlight any significant issues or omissions. Areas requiring improvement were acted on immediately.

The practice had a governance system that included policies and procedures, which were accessible to staff. Policies, protocols and procedures were in place, but we noted some of the policies had not been regularly reviewed. Following our inspection the provider told us they had reviewed the relevant policies to ensure they were reflective of the practice.

Staff were aware of the importance of protecting patients’ personal information. Staff password protected patients’ electronic care records, and paper records were stored securely and complied with General Data Protection Regulations.

Some improvements were required to ensure that risk management processes were fully effective, particularly in relation to staff recruitment, fire safety and the servicing and maintenance of equipment.

There were effective processes for investigating incidents and accidents, and for receiving and acting on safety alerts. We noted the practice did not have an accident book that was GDPR compliant. The provider addressed this matter immediately following our inspection.

The practice had systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance.

Concerns and complaints were responded to appropriately, and outcomes were discussed to share learning and for improvement. In response to our inspection feedback, the provider updated the complaints procedure for accuracy and improved accessibility for patients.

Staff had clear responsibilities, and systems of accountability to support good governance.

Staff feedback was obtained through meetings, surveys, and informal discussions.

Feedback from patients, the public and external partners was collected to which the practice responded.

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.