Hampton 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

WELL-LED: Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

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 practice had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

Managers and staff we spoke with told us they felt confident and supported by the training they received, enabling them to provide safe, caring and patient-focused care. Management listened to feedback, learnt from experiences, and the practice worked together to keep improving.

All staff were able to contribute to the development of the practice vision and strategy, which was kept under review.

The practice 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 were approachable and responded to any concerns raised. We saw the leadership team worked with other practices in the primary care network and were engaged in the development of primary care services within the local area. Staff told us leaders were visible and responsive and there was a clear structure in place.

The practice fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

The practice had established Freedom to Speak up arrangements with other practices in the local area. Staff were aware of how to raise concerns, and we saw examples where staff had used the arrangements in place to positive effect.

Staff we spoke with told us there were no barriers to speaking up and their views were listened to and acted upon. This aligned with the management approach of being actively engaged with staff to seek their views.

The practice valued diversity in their workforce. They worked 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 leaders recognised, and agreed, reasonable adjustments to enable staff to carry out their roles effectively.

Adjustments had been made to ensure all staff were valued, for example we saw adjustments to support disabled staff were in place.

The practice 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 act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. The provider had established governance processes that were appropriate for their service. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. Managers held regular practice meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical concerns and emerging risks. Managers recorded actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously.

The practice had a programme of clinical audits. Most audits we looked at, where the practice had completed more than one audit of the same matter, were simply repeated first cycle audits. These offered limited opportunity for learning and improvement over time. Two, or more, cycle audits review the findings of the first audit and use these to make further changes to improve performance. The following audit results show whether the changes have led to improvement. This process can be repeated to continue to make improvements.

However, the practice did provide us with a two-cycle audit of coil checks. This was a completed audit cycle having both first and second cycles. The findings from the first cycle had been used to inform an approach for the follow-up audit. Following the second audit, the practice found improved documentation and higher uptake of follow up appointments. The findings were used to inform a future follow-up audit.

The practice 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.

The provider worked with other practices within their primary care network to offer extended access, and flu and covid vaccination programmes.

There was an active patient participation group (PPG) which met with the practice 4 times a year. We saw copies of minutes from the last 2 meetings. Members of the PPG we spoke with were pleased to be engaged with the practice. For example, when the practice had implemented a new appointment booking system, a representative from the software provider attended a PPG meeting to discuss the new system and to listen to any concerns. The views of the PPG had also been instrumental in developing some of the initiatives the practice ran. For example, a PPG member had recommended a suitable venue for the monthly walk and talk events.

However, we were told that the practice set the full agenda for meetings. The PPG said it would like the opportunity to include items they wished to raise.

We also spoke to the manager of 1 of the local care and nursing homes for which the practice provided GP services. We were told that a clinician attended weekly and acted on any changes in residents needs. The manager we spoke to told us the practice was very responsive to requests for visits outside of the scheduled attendances. We were also told that residents had benefitted from suggestions clinicians had made to improve health and care.

The practice 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 practice had a quality improvement plan in place to help drive improvements in services to meet the needs of its patient population. It was also dealing with several other issues beyond its normal day-to-day work. These included the impact of introducing new online patient appointment and triage software; and a period of high staff turnover earlier in 2026. The latter arising from a combination of retirement, re-location to another area, seeking career progression and long-term absence.

To address these issues the practice had introduced a range of initiatives, including successfully recruiting replacement staff. The new appointment triage system had received positive take-up from patients. This included an early meeting for PPG members with a representative of the supplier company to discuss and resolve their concerns. It had also freed up some GP time as they were no longer required to manage all triage work.

Other management systems had been reviewed and implemented. For example, the practice was using a proprietary system to manage blood test results. It streamlined administrative processes and improved the management of blood test results. This, and other automated administrative tasks, had reduced administrative staffs’ manual workload, giving more time to focus on patient-facing activities and more complex work.

The practice had been awarded a Royal College of General Practice (RCGP) Active Practice status for reducing sedentary behaviour in staff and patients, increasing physical activity in staff and patients, and being part of an active community. Initiatives it had introduced included monthly “walk and talk” events in a local park. These staff led events had benefitted patients via improved physical and mental health with several friendships developing amongst participating patients who had previously experienced periods of isolation. Staff had also been invited to participate in monthly yoga classes.