Gants Hill Medical Centre

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 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 practice completed merging with a nearby practice (Redbridge Surgery) in October 2024, taking on approximately an additional 3,000 patients. Leaders at the practice spoke about some of the challenges the merge created, the effect it had on some patients and the efforts made to address these challenges. Leaders at the practice created a shared vision, strategy and culture to streamline management and duties across both sites. This was based on transparency, equity, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

All staff had contributed to the development of the practice vision and strategy, which was kept under review. The practice was aware of the projected increase in the local population and was working with partner agencies to address future challenges.

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 practice was approachable and responded to any concerns raised. Members of the leadership team worked closely with other practices in the primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area.

The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. Staff were aware of how to raise concerns and felt there was an open-door policy with leaders at the practice to do so. The practice had a Freedom to Speak Up Guardian within the practice but had not, at the time of the assessment, established arrangements for staff to reach out to someone outside of the practice. The practice informed us arrangements were made after the inspection.

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. Adjustments had been made to ensure all staff were valued and found no concerns reported regarding workforce equality.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Responsibilities were shared across the team. However, we found some systems of governance used to manage the quality of care and treatment were not fully effective. For example, we did not see evidence of regular practice meetings being held, evidence of formal clinical supervision implemented for members of the clinical team and found safeguarding level three training was incomplete for two members of staff.

The management of significant events was not fully effective as not all incidents were documented in the significant events log, and we found limited evidence that complaints were consistently used as opportunities for learning and service improvement.

Immediately after the inspection, the practice provided evidence of strengthened governance and management arrangements to address the issues identified. For example, they submitted evidence of completed safeguarding training and updated records documenting significant events that had previously been omitted.

The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services work seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

We saw examples of engagement with healthcare partners to review and plan care for patients with complex conditions or those nearing end of life. This included regular visits for patients in a local care home.

The PPG worked with the practice to improve services for patients. They told us the practice listened to their views and acted upon them. For example, the practice followed through on a request for all staff to wear badges to display their names.

The service focused on innovation and improvement. We saw examples of clinical and non-clinical audits being performed on a regular basis. They encouraged ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. The practice actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.