Sidley Medical Practice Also known as Dr Lawton & Partners

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

At a previous assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. We identified breaches of the regulations.

Staff reported feeling tired, overwhelmed and unsupported by the practice management team and the partners. Staff told us they did not feel trained, supported or confident to respond to people’s immediate needs in the absence of a clinician being contactable. We found no established and effective systems and processes in place to ensure people’s clinical needs were responded to in a timely and consistent manner.

People told us they were not supported to receive continuity in their care but had a choice over how and when they received care.

This service scored 50 (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 Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

People were not consistently treated as individuals. People told us they were not supported to receive continuity of care from clinicians unless requested by the person. Staff told us they received no guidance from management on how they scheduled clinics and make appointments for people. Some staff told us they cared for their patients and always tried to provide them with time and patience when providing care to ensure it met their needs and preferences.

People were offered choice over where they received their care and where appropriate to have people accompany them as support. Where possible people were seen by their preferred clinician.

Staff told us they did not feel supported or confident to respond to people’s immediate needs in the absence of a clinician being contactable. We found no established and effective systems and processes in place to ensure peoples clinical needs were responded to in a timely and consistent manner. There were disparities in the service people received depending on how they contacted the practice. For example, in person, by the telephone, or via an online clinical triage system.

Staff reported feeling tired, overwhelmed and unsupported by the practice management team and the partners. Staff were not given opportunities to provide feedback, or support to raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences.

Staff members were visibly upset when speaking about their experiences at work. Some staff told us they never saw the registered partners. Whilst other staff members told us the partners never acknowledged them, they did not know their name or what they did despite working for the service for several years. Staff did not feel valued by the provider or listened to. For example; staff had raised concerns regarding the high number of clinical appointments scheduled per session and the expectation they would continue to cover clinics where staff were absent. No action had been taken by the provider to address these concerns.