Dr Rana Chowdhury

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 the previous assessment in March 2025, we found governance systems were not effective. For example, the leadership of the practice had not made all the necessary improvements or embedded the governance changes required of them. At this assessment we have found improvements in governance, new systems have been implemented and embedded for referrals, significant events and safeguarding. However, further work was needed to embed some systems to ensure improvements were sustained. For example, oversight of staff training and immunisations, improved information on the practice website, access to online appointments and the involvement in innovative projects or quality improvement activity, to improve the quality of care.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

At the previous assessment in March 2025, we found the mission statement stated, ‘we aim to provide all our patients with professional accessible high-quality person-centred care in a safe, responsive and courteous manner.’ However, the practice could not demonstrate they could achieve the direction of the mission statement. because the statement was not developed in collaboration with people using the service, and staff. In addition, there was no evidence the statement was related to any relevant local factors such as the needs of the local population. In addition, at the time of the assessment the statement had not been implemented.

At this assessment, the practice submitted practice meeting minutes for September 2025, where the mission statement was raised at the meeting, this demonstrated that the mission statement was kept under review.

The practice had a business continuity plan and disaster recovery plan to allow them to operate under exceptional and adverse circumstances. The practice provided evidence that they were considering a succession plan, which involved the recruitment of a new partner.

At the previous assessment in March 2025, we found that the leadership of the practice had not made all the necessary improvements or embedded the changes. This meant that the leadership of the practice could not demonstrate their capability to deliver consistently high-quality care and treatment.

At this assessment we have found that the practice had made improvements to their safeguarding and referral system and oversight by leaders had improved. The practice had employed staff to carry out specific tasks such as patient record summaries, referrals and safeguarding, which had enabled them to demonstrate better care and treatment. The practice had carried out a staff survey to ensure staffs wellbeing and all staff told us they felt supported by the provider and practice manager.

The practice fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.All staff had completed their whistleblowing training and there was a whistleblowing policy in place last reviewed in 2024. The practice now had independent freedom to speak up guardians for staff to speak with. Staff we spoke with said they would feel comfortable in making their views heard.

At the previous assessment in March 2025, we found there was no system in place to ensure staff wellbeing, such as consideration of working arrangements or occupational health for staff.

At this assessment we found the practice had carried out a staff wellbeing survey in July and December 2025, whether they had received 6 responses in July and 7 in December. The results in December demonstrated an improvement a more positive staff experience. For example, the staff did not make any negative responses, there was an increase in the strongly agree and agree responses. Leaders told us they valued and supported all team members.

The practice staff also had access to occupational health at a local hospital.

At the previous assessment in March 2025, we found the governance processes were not working effectively and it was not possible to be assured that the leadership of the practice would be able to identify for themselves when systems needed improvement and make these changes so they could deliver safe care and treatment to the patients.

At this assessment we found improvements had been made to the governance processes. For example, staff had been allocated specific oversight tasks, the referral, safety netting, significant event and safeguarding processes had improved. The practice manager had reviewed the practices policies and most reflected the practices processes. The practice had commenced monthly clinical, and clinical governance meetings to improve learning. The practice had an operational risk register in place to monitor risks to the practice.

However, further work was needed to embed some systems to ensure effective oversight by leaders is maintained. For example, oversight of staff training and immunisations, further information on the practice website, and access to online appointments.

The practice was part of the local primary care network, and the lead GP attended their meetings. The local ICB had been supporting the provider to improve the safety and quality of the practice. At the time of the assessment, the staff explained they were not engaged in any local community projects or PCN initiatives, to improve the practice and quality of care for the local population.

There was a patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. We were provided with a copy of the last meeting minutes for January 2026 which demonstrated the patients were informed of any changes at practice. This was confirmed by a member of the group.

At the previous assessment in March 2025, we found the practice did not demonstrate the system to identify, report and learning from concerns, safety incidents and near misses both internally and externally was fully effective. At this assessment we found the practice had concentrated upon making improvements to their system and processes so they could provide better and safer care. This meant they had not yet started to engage fully in innovation projects.

The practice had arranged a coffee and cake event. Eight carers attended were provided with advice and referred to the social prescriber and dietitian. They were also planning further events to support people in 2026.