Mr Osman Mohammed Also known as Manningham Lane Dental 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 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.

At the inspection on 5 August 2026, we found the practice had made the following improvements to comply with the regulation:

The arrangements to ensure staff could respond to medical emergencies had improved. Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines that were checked in line with national guidance. Staff we spoke to knew how to respond to a medical emergency. Not all staff had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support. We highlighted the importance of all staff receiving appropriate training and ongoing medical emergency scenario training to ensure understanding of the process, and refrigerated medicines should not be stored with food.

Staff understood the signs and symptoms of sepsis and had resources to support them.

Improvements had been made to the management of hazardous substances. We saw these were now stored and labelled appropriately. We highlighted the risk assessments for hazardous substances should be updated.

Inconsistencies in infection prevention and control processes had been addressed. There were clearer procedures and communication between day and evening staff to ensure consistency. Heavy duty gloves were changed weekly, instruments were now clearly marked with the date of reprocessing, and the use of dental unit waterline disinfectant was now used in line with manufacturer’s instructions. Monthly hot and cold-water temperatures were taken from outlets identified in the risk assessment report and documented.

Staff carried out appropriate validation checks on decontamination devices to ensure their effectiveness. We saw sterilised instruments were clean and stored appropriately. We highlighted staff should monitor the temperature of solution used to manually clean instruments and test strips should be used for every autoclave cycle.

The oversight and quality of patient care records had significantly improved. We looked at a selection of patient care records which were consistently in line with recognised guidance.

Some improvements had been made to the oversight of recruitment processes, and new staff members had received appropriate role-specific structured inductions. However, the recruitment policy was still not being followed consistently. In particular, Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, references and evidence of immunity against Hepatitis B were not consistently obtained or risk assessed. We saw some evidence of professional indemnity held on file had expired. We highlighted implementing systems to organise and structure staff files more effectively would support them to identify any omissions and act on these. Further evidence was sent after the inspection to demonstrate this was being addressed.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding, how to access safeguarding information and how to escalate concerns within the practice and externally. However, the practice did not ensure that all staff completed safeguarding training to the appropriate level. Evidence of training was sent after the inspection.

Staff were provided with access to an online training portal. However, there was still a lack of oversight to assess training needs for staff at the start of employment or ensure staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. We discussed this with the provider and were assured this was being addressed as some evidence of training was submitted after the inspection.

There were systems for receiving safety alerts. The provider should document where these are reviewed and actioned as appropriate.

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.