Bradley and Partners

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 not providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations. We will be following up on our concerns to ensure the provider had made the required improvements.

During our inspection of this key question, we found a lack of systems or processes that enabled the registered person to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services being provided. There was also a lack of systems or processes to assess, monitor and mitigate the risks relating to the health, safety and welfare of service users and others who may be at risk.

This resulted in a breach of Regulation 17, Good governance.

You can find more details of our concerns in the detailed findings below.

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.

There had been a lack of oversight and leadership at the practice which had led to omissions and ineffective systems.

Systems for ensuring that information in the form of policies and procedures was kept up to date were ineffective as they were not reviewed at timely intervals and there were no systems to ensure that staff had read and understood them. Following our inspection we were sent evidence that all policies and procedures had been updated and a system created to ensure regular review and updating. Staff discussed this at practice meetings and a review and check sheet introduced for staff to sign to declare they understood the content of the policies.

We saw that improvements were required to the processes in place for identifying and managing risks.

The practice had ineffective systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. No audits were undertaken or completed according to recognised guidance. Action is needed to ensure audits of radiography, infection prevention and control, record keeping and antimicrobial prescribing are undertaken at regular intervals to maintain or improve the quality of the service. The practice should also ensure that, where appropriate, audits have documented learning points, and the resulting improvements can be demonstrated. Following our inspection we were sent evidence the practice had implemented systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance.

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.