The Bridge 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 71 (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.

Staff described the culture at the practice as patient focused, friendly and understanding. As a small practice, this enabled close teamwork and continuity for patients. Staff also told us managers were approachable, which supported effective communication and collaborative working.

The practice engaged with patients through their patient participation group in the primary care network which contributed to discussions about service development and improvement. This supported the practice's commitment to working collaboratively with patients and fostering a culture of openness, engagement and continuous improvement.

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 did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance.

The practice had not ensured consistent oversight of recruitment in line with legislation; staff files did not contain all required documentation to evidence safe recruitment was in place prior to employment. The governance system for monitoring and ensuring staff had completed mandatory training was not effective. The practice identified risks through risk assessments and audits, however, actions arising from these were not always clearly documented, monitored and communicated to staff, which made it difficult to identify what had been completed and what remained an action to address. All policies and procedures were accessible to staff, however, there was not an effective system in place to identify when a policy needed to be reviewed. Following our feedback, the practice responded quickly to provide assurances to evidence that improvements had been made to improve their systems to monitor compliance in the areas identified.

Leaders provided ongoing support to staff through regular appraisals and performance reviews and staff reported feeling very supported in their roles. Alongside regular team meetings to discuss emerging risks, service developments and opportunities for improvement, staff also had daily huddles to check in with each other. GP’s received fortnightly newsletters to keep them informed of best practice updates. The service worked collaboratively with the primary care network and other partner organisations to support service delivery and improve outcomes for people using the service.

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.