Archived: Russell Street Group practice

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.

We assessed 5 quality statements from this key question. We recognised that there had been improvements to the practice since our inspection, and staff feedback was positive about working at the practice. We found the provider had introduced and established policies, systems of accountability and good governance. However, documentation was not always stored and monitored in a systematic way, meaning it was difficult for the practice leadership team to have management oversight of certain areas such as recruitment checks and training records.

At our last inspection in May 2024, we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection it improved to good.

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. Staff we interviewed were able to describe how to respond to patient needs in a holistic manner. They also showed knowledge of the practice’s vision and values. Senior leaders demonstrated awareness of the local demographics and adapted access needs accordingly. For example, the reception team had recently received training on care navigation and pharmacy referral to improve the access demands of the local population. This enabled reception staff to allocate and signpost patients effectively.

Staff told us there was compassionate and inclusive leadership at the practice. Staff feedback suggested were generally happy with the communication across the practice.Leaders demonstrated the skills, knowledge and experience to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. At this inspection we noted a new GP partner, and a practice manager had joined the service, further strengthening the leadership capacity. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities, and the new leadership demonstrated a commitment to continuously improving the service.

Staff feedback confirmed that the service promoted a positive and open culture where staff felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The practice had established Freedom to Speak up arrangements internally and externally. Staff were aware of how to raise concerns, including the Freedom to Speak Up process.

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 and well-defined responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability. However, staff feedback suggested that deployment of staff across 3 sites could be improved.

Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. We saw evidence that any actions arising from these meetings were clearly recorded and shared with staff. There were systems in place for staff to receive annual appraisal.

We saw inconsistencies in recording and management of staff recruitment and training records. However, the practice demonstrated a responsive approach to these findings and acknowledged to embed these improvements into routine operations.

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.

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and had made considerable progress since the last inspection.

We saw examples where the practice had used learning from significant events and complaints to improve the service they provided. The practice had an active patient participation group (PPG) and referred to them as critical friends and valued their experiences and contribution to improving the service. Leaders actively engaged with the local community to understand their needs and to deliver the best possible care. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

The practice had an ambition and was working towards becoming a training practice for GP undertaking GP training programme.