Ramanathan Surgery

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 the service’s leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care and promoted an open and fair culture. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains 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, human rights, diversity, inclusion and engagement. Staff and leaders understood the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

All staff had contributed to the development of the service’s vision and strategy, which was kept under review. Leaders monitored and reviewed progress against the delivery of their strategy. The service was aware of local challenges which affected their service, such as the projected increase in the local population over the coming years and worked with partner agencies to address these challenges. Staff and leaders actively promoted equality and diversity and worked to identify the causes of any workforce inequalities. They demonstrated a positive and compassionate listening culture that focused on learning and development.

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

The provider had established governance processes relating to the quality statements reviewed during this assessment, which were appropriate for the service. However, these systems were not always effective in identifying risks, monitoring compliance or ensuring that actions were taken in a timely manner. During the assessment, whilst areas of risk were identified this was promptly recognised and corrective action was immediately taken without delay.

The provider responded appropriately to the issue and strengthened the relevant arrangements to reduce the risk of recurrence. This demonstrated effective oversight and a commitment to maintaining safe, high- quality and sustainable care.

All staff we spoke with were clear about their individual roles and responsibilities. Leaders provided regular support to staff and met with them to undertake appraisals and performance reviews.

Staff had access to the policies and procedures required to carry out their roles. These were regularly reviewed, kept up to date and reflected current guidance and best practice.

Leaders held regular staff meetings where emerging risks, service performance and opportunities for improvement were discussed. Actions arising from these meetings were clearly documented and shared with staff to support accountability and oversight.

Staff understood the importance of maintaining confidentiality and information security. This included verifying people's identities during remote consultations to ensure personal information was protected. The service also submitted data and statutory notifications to external agencies as required.

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.