Drs Thachankary and Krishnan Also known as Stuart Road 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 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 requires improvement due to identified concerns which included limited staff involvement and understanding of the direction and culture of the organisation and concerns regarding its delivery, a lack of staff awareness of external employee support services, and governance and oversight concerns. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good overall due to improvements made by the provider.

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 provider 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.

Whilst many staff had not been involved in drawing together the vision and values of the organisation, we saw that leaders and managers had worked to raise awareness of these. All staff we spoke with or received feedback from were clear that they followed the ethos of this vision and their values and told us that they wanted to provide good accessible local care to patients. Staff told us that the culture of the practice was friendly and supportive, and that leaders and managers were approachable and compassionate. To support their delivery of their vision, values and culture the provider had developed and adopted a 5-year business plan which had been approved in January 2026. The plan included key areas and commitments such as financial stability, accessibility and engagement.

The provider was aware of local health challenges, and we saw evidence that they were working with partners to tackle these. An example being proposed joint working in respect of frailty and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Staff we spoke with or received feedback from, told us that they felt that the culture within the organisation has significantly improved since the last assessment of the service in 2025. Many felt that the leadership team had made a positive impact on the operation of the practice.

The provider 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.

At the previous assessment undertaken in 2025 concerns were raised with us by members regarding staffing levels. At this assessment staff told us that they felt that staffing levels had improved, and they felt that concerns were now more actively listened to. Furthermore, when we spoke with staff, or reviewed responses to Care Quality Commission (CQC) questionnaires which had been sent to staff as part of our assessment, they told us that they felt well supported by leaders and managers in 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 provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. It had established Freedom to Speak up arrangements and processes.

Leaders and managers told us that they had an open-door approach which allowed staff to raise concerns with them directly, and this was corroborated by feedback we received from staff. Staff told us that they felt that leaders and managers were approachable, and that they felt issues would be listened to.

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

We saw that there were key policies and procedures in place to promote diversity, equality, and the protection of staff. This included zero tolerance, and grievance and whistleblowing policies and procedures.

We heard from staff how adjustments had been made to support staff when they experienced a change of circumstances. This included changes in working hours. At the last assessment some staff reported that they were unaware of external support services such as occupational health. During this assessment staff told us that they had been made aware of this support and how it could be accessed.

The provider 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.

Leaders and managers had put an organisational structure in place to ensure the effective management of services. This included the appointment of partners and senior staff to act as leads and champions for key activities such as safeguarding, information governance and performance monitoring.

We saw that meetings were held which supported good governance and management. These included management meetings, clinical meetings, and full team meetings. We also saw that the staff from the practice regularly engaged with external partners such as their primary care network.

Following the last assessment of the practice undertaken in 2025 we saw that the provider had improved governance and oversight processes. This included tackling many of the concerns raised during the last assessment relating to medicines safety, staffing, results handling, statutory notification processes, and health and safety.

Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews.

The provider 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 provider worked with other practices within their primary care network to offer additional services such as extended access and support from social prescribers. We saw that the provider met and worked with stakeholders and partners to manage and better support complex or vulnerable patients.

Working with their primary care network (PCN) the provider told us that they were planning to undertake some patient support activities around frail patients and those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The cohort will be a mix of patients who have COPD or frailty or both. It is planned that multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings will be held in-house weekly, with a monthly MDT at PCN level where patients, results and outcomes will be discussed and best practice shared. The first of the PCN MDTs is planned to take place in October 2026.

The surgery operated a Patient Participation Group (PPG) which met quarterly. Feedback from a PPG member indicated that the provider worked closely with them, respected them, and took action when they gave feedback.

The provider had a focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and the local health and care system.

The practice had a programme of quality improvement activities which included clinical and non-clinical audits, and regular searches of the clinical system to ensure compliance with best practice principles. The practice also had performance monitoring processes in place and used this to identify areas for service improvement. For example, from a review of minutes of the clinical reference group we saw evidence that performance for key delivery areas was examined to track achievement and highlight areas for action.

This approach to improvement was in addition to learning from significant events, near misses, complaints, and feedback from patient surveys and their patient participation group.