Dr Rabiatov Dabo

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; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating has remained the same.

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.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

Leaders in the practice told us that their core values were “warmth, openness, friendliness, sensitivity, fairness and respect.” They said these values were demonstrated to staff and patients which created a “supportive team with a great team spirit.” All staff had contributed to the development of the practice vision and strategy, which was kept under review. Feedback from staff aligned with what leaders told us. The staff team was diverse and reflective of the local community.

The service had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Staff told us leaders in the practice was approachable and responded to any concerns raised. Staff also told us leaders modelled the values of the practice. We saw the leadership team worked with other practices in the primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The practice had established Freedom to Speak up arrangements with other practices in the primary care network. There was a poster displayed in the practice advising of who the freedom to speak up guardian was and how to contact them. This meant staff were aware of how to raise concerns.

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them.

Policies and procedures to promote diversity and equality were in place. Adjustments had been made to ensure all staff were valued. For example, we saw adjustments to support with caring responsibilities and flexibility with working hours around religious observances.

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. They act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

The principal doctor explained their governance structure. They said that the practice manager, one of the salaried GP’s and the lead nurse formed the leadership team. They each had lead roles in the practice, or example safeguarding and infection control.

Staff told us that leaders and managers supported them, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. We reviewed staff records and saw evidence of completed appraisals.

The provider had established governance processes that were appropriate for their service. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. We saw completed meeting minutes which confirmed this. Managers clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously, and we saw signed confidentiality policies in staff files.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They share information and learning with partners and collaborate for improvement.

The principal GP told us that they worked closely with the Integrated Commissioning Board (ICB), and they participated in the medicine’s optimisation incentive scheme. This is a scheme that focuses on improving the safe, high-quality, and cost-effective use of medicines within GP practices. This involved the ICB closely and regularly auditing their prescribing patterns to ensure they adhere to national and local guidance. They also had regular monthly meetings within the primary care network to discuss clinical matters.

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.

All staff were encouraged to put forward and test out new ways of working. Staff gave an example of changes to the process of notifying patients via text when their test results were normal. Staff felt this caused “text fatigue” because patients received multiple texts. Due to staff feedback the automated system was stopped and another system put in place to notify them.

There were opportunities for staff to learn and develop. We saw examples of staff who started in non-clinical roles and were supported to progress to clinical roles and GPs completed “train the trainer” courses.