Veor 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. At this assessment, the rating has changed.
 

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 clear vision and strategy that encompassed putting people at the heart of care, in collaboration with wider teams. The vision reflected the service’s understanding of its population as well as the challenges it faced.
All staff had contributed to the development of the service’s vision and strategy, which was kept under review. The service was aware of the projected increase in the local population and was working with partner agencies to address future challenges. Staff were clear on the service’s strategy and how their roles played a part in it.
The service worked as part of a local primary care network (a group of GP services that work together with other local health and social care organisations to provide integrated services for their communities to increase services to their patient population). The service was taking steps to develop and work as part of an integrated neighbourhood team (A local NHS team where health and social care professionals work together to give joined-up support for people in the community) to further strengthen the service provision for the population they serve.
 

The service 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.
Staff told us leaders in the service were approachable and responded to any concerns raised. Staff also told us leaders modelled the values of the service. We saw the leadership team worked with other services in the local primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area as part of their commitment to their integrated neighbourhood team development.
Leaders were aware of the challenges they faced as a service and the areas they needed to improve and had clear action plans to be able to drive these improvements forward. For example, recognising the growing population due to new housing schemes and planning for this as part of their neighbourhood team strategy.
There were clear lines of responsibility to support capable leadership. The service had job descriptions for all staff and had ensured staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities.
 

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff told us they felt able to speak up about concerns they had.
The service had a Freedom to Speak up policy and arrangements that included links to external organisations staff may need to be aware of. There was a Freedom to Speak Up Guardian (FTSUG), staff were aware of how to raise concerns and told us they felt confident to do so. The service had a Whistleblowing Policy which was accessible to staff. The policy outlined the process for raising concerns internally and externally.
 

The service valued diversity in their workforce. They work towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who work for them.
Policies and procedures to promote diversity and equality were in place. We saw senior leaders had addressed concerns related to discrimination. Adjustments had been made to ensure all staff were valued, for example we saw reasonable adjustments to support disabled staff had been implemented.
Staff had completed appropriate training. There was a policy and procedure to protect staff from bullying and harassment.
Staff teams within the service held regular meetings to be able to communicate changes and minutes were recorded. This was also evident in staff members’ involvement in the daily meeting where all staff were invited take part.
 

The service now 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 now act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate. Where we had identified issues during our clinical searches and on site visit, the service acted quickly to address any issues identified.
Since the last inspection the service had made improvements to its governance arrangements and had embedded use of its digital system TeamNet (a system that is used in GP Practices to manage staff, communication and operations across services). This resulted in the leaders having better oversight in areas such as staff training and emergency medicines checks.

The service held a governance handbook that underpinned staff members’ roles and responsibilities. It also encompassed clinical governance, corporate governance, and finances. Staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities within the service.

The service had a Caldicott and Confidentiality Policy with links to the local integrated care board (ICB) and had utilised the NHS Data Protection Toolkit to ensure compliance with data security standards and protect patient information. Staff took confidentiality and information security seriously. Staff could tell us the steps they take to ensure information security is upheld with regards to their workstations and the security of the premises.
The service held regular meetings in various operational areas to communicate changes and share learning. Meetings were recorded with clear actions and could be shared across appropriate staff teams. Clinical meetings took place to discuss people and provide oversight such as opportunistic identification of blood monitoring needing to take place or risks of opioid usage identified.
 

The service 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.
There was a community café within the service, and this offered people an affordable hot drink and access to the various groups held within the café space provided by volunteers and the social prescriber of the service. For example, a club for people who were neurodiverse, a ‘knit and natter’ group and a coffee morning. The café itself was run by volunteers. When referring to the café staff told us “It’s a really nice way to talk with patients’’ and “It helps connect people”.
The service was actively developing its integrated neighbourhood team which is a multidisciplinary group of health, social care and voluntary sector professionals and had received funding from the local integrated care board (ICB) to develop resources within its locality. The plan outlined wider system objectives such as a shared triage system that provided access to services within the locality.
The service also identified the appropriate organisations that would support the needs of its population, such as a service that provides support with applying for benefits and a bereavement group.
The service was part of a local primary care network (PCN, which are a group of GP services that work together with other local health and social care organisations to provide integrated services for their communities). The service benefitted from the roles and services delivered by the PCN and the service had taken steps to ensure staff employed by the PCN were integrated into the service’s team.
The service worked in an integrated way with health and social care colleagues, and this was evidenced through multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings. (An MDT meeting is a gathering of healthcare professionals from different specialties who collaborate to discuss and make decisions about people’s care and treatment).
 

The service focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contribute to safe, effective practice and research.
The service had received local recognition for its approach to supporting people living with diabetes. They had undertaken a new approach to supporting people with this diagnosis and had implemented a ‘super Sunday’ that engages people to take part in health monitoring of their condition and enabled the service to reach more people.
The service utilised artificial intelligence systems to support identifying people who were at risk or require continuity of care and was actively researching other systems to be able to deliver more GP appointments.
The service is part of the DEEP End network, which is a national initiative that brings together GP services serving communities with the highest levels of deprivation. The network supports GP services to share learning and improve access to care for people who face the greatest health inequalities.
Staff were encouraged to develop their skill set to enable them to take on new roles, responsibilities and further their career. For example, a member of the reception team being supported to train as a nurse. had. Staff told us they could access training through a training hub and that they were supported by the service to do so.