Grange Medical 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

At our last inspection, we rated this key question as good. Following this assessment, the rating remains the same.

Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and there were systems and processes in place to support their safety and well-being. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. There was a culture of continuous improvement.

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.

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 service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Staff told us they had access to policies and procedures to support them within their role. Leaders told us about the ways in which they monitored and mitigated risks and performance. For example, they were continuously working to improve their childhood immunisation and cervical screening uptake rates.

There was a meeting structure in place and minutes available to staff who could not attend. Staff attended regular meetings where issues complaints, significant events and clinical concerns were discussed. There was a business continuity plan and this detailed arrangements in place in the event of certain incidents. The practice had processes in place to submit data and notifications to external organisations. Staff used data to monitor and improve performance. For example, GPs regularly reviewed cancer outcomes data. There was a data security protection policy in place and information governance training was provided to staff. Staff we spoke with were aware of the importance of patient confidentiality and information security. Workflows for communication and pathology results were up to date at the time of our assessment. Managers and supervisors met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews.

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

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.