Petersfield 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 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 was developing a new mission statement which they planned to share with staff and the Patient Participation Group. The mission statement was linked to their long-term strategy. The mission statement included providing safe, effective, compassionate, and patient-centred healthcare that was accessible, responsive, and tailored to the needs of the community. The vision was to be a trusted forward-thinking practice that delivered outstanding primary care and improved the health and wellbeing of the community.

Staff we spoke to told us they were felt supported by the leadership and management team, the culture and direction of the service, and each other. Staff told us leaders were approachable and took the time to listen. There was an appropriate whistleblowing procedure in place, which was accessible to staff.

The practice implemented staff health and wellbeing initiatives, including recognition schemes, financial and practical support, and improvements to the working environment, to promote a positive culture, supported staff retention, and enable the delivery of safe, high-quality patient care.

The practice was an established training practice for GPs.

The practice had a realistic strategy which included workforce sustainability and succession planning, the delivery of high-quality patient care, service development and innovation.

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.

Staff had clear roles, responsibilities, and governance systems to support sustainable care and treatment. Staff were well-supported, understood their roles, and received regular training and appraisals.

Leaders held regular meetings to address clinical concerns and risks; however, the minutes were brief and did not clearly identify or record actions. The provider had largely established governance processes in relation to the quality statements we reviewed during this assessment, which were appropriate for their service. Staff could access all required policies and procedures. To support good governance the practice held regular reception and administration, and partnership meetings.

Staff took confidentiality and information security seriously, which included verifying people’s identities during remote consultations.

There was evidence in practice meeting minutes of learning from significant events and complaints, however this was not always replicated in the clinical meeting minutes. Following the assessment, the provider explained that the meetings would follow a structured agenda covering appropriate areas such as complaints, significant events and complex cases.

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.