Rushden 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.

We found there was a gradual improvement demonstrated in patient satisfaction with the service however, the Friends and Family Test scores remained very low, and the latest National GP Patient Survey results were significantly below both local and national averages. In addition, the vast majority of feedback from patients via the ‘Give Feedback on Care’ was negative about the service they received. Therefore, the governance arrangements for the practice systems and processes required improvement and embedding to impact positively on patient experience. We rated therefore rated this key question as Requires Improvement.

This service scored 62 (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 clear mission statement: ‘We are committed as primary healthcare professionals to help our patients resume their lifelong pursuit of both physical/mental health and well-being.’

The practice had a vision to be a practice that performs outstanding primary care in line with patient needs and at the highest level of patient satisfaction. The practice strived to attract, reward and retain highly skilled staff and help them grow in their careers.

Leaders were committed to striving to maintain an environment which is welcoming, caring and accessible to all the practice patients; and aimed to treat all patients fairly and equally, with dignity and respect. Our assessment found the culture of the practice to be open, transparent, blame free and non-discriminatory and we saw staff worked well together.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They endeavoured to be both present and approachable for staff.

Leaders actively engaged with patients, staff, and partner organisations to gather feedback and they took action in response. Leaders told us they operated an ‘open door’ policy and encouraged staff to raise concerns.

From March 2026 the practice had employed a new Practice Manager, and a number of changes had been implemented to improve the patient experience of the service. We saw evidence of an action plan and gradual improvements to patient feedback data. During our onsite visit we observed leaders were enthusiastic about making changes for the better wherever they could.

The practice strived to ensure staff could speak up and their voice would be heard. There were systems and policies in place to support staff to whistle blow or to speak with a ‘Freedom to Speak Up Guardian’ if they needed to. The practice had appointed the Patient Experience Manager as the ‘Freedom to Speak Up Guardian.’ The Freedom to Speak Up policy directed staff to NHS England and CQC if they wanted to raise any concerns with an external organisation.

Through regular team meetings, supervision, appraisals and informal discussions, leaders encouraged staff to share feedback, ideas and concerns about patient care and service delivery. Staff told us they felt listened to, respected and supported by leaders, and were confident that any issues raised would be taken seriously and acted upon appropriately. The practice demonstrated a commitment to learning and improvement by responding constructively to concerns and sharing learning across the team where appropriate.

The practice valued diversity in their workforce. They had an inclusive and fair culture which had improved equality and equity for people who work for them. Policies and procedures to promote diversity and equality were in place. Staff had received training in equality, diversity and inclusion and were aware of supporting people with protected characteristics such as age, gender, religion and disability. There was a zero tolerance to bullying and harassment and leaders were committed to providing an inclusive and supportive working environment.

Staff reported high levels of job satisfaction and were encouraged by leaders to be involved in contributing to the running of the practice and improving the service delivered for patients.

Our assessment found whilst there were governance arrangements in place, the practice systems and processes required improvement and embedding to impact positively on the patient experience of the service they received. We found there was a gradual improvement demonstrated in patient satisfaction with the service. NHS Friends and Family data showed in April 2026, 30% of patients surveyed responded they would recommend the practice to family and friends. May 2026 data showed a slight improvement to 35% of patients surveyed. June 2026 data showed another improvement to 44% of patients surveyed responding they would recommend the practice to family and friends. However, these scores remained very low, and the latest National GP Patient Survey results were significantly below both local and national averages. In addition, the vast majority of feedback from patients via CQC’s ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process was negative about the service they received.

The practice had established policies and procedures which all staff could access. Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers held regular meetings with staff, during which they discussed clinical and non-clinical concerns and emerging risks. Managers clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously.

The practice used a cloud-based Work Operating System (Monday.com) to bring together a range of governance, operational and improvement activities into a single system. Leaders reported this system facilitated their performance monitoring of the service being provided for patients and the systems and processes being operated.

Overall, we found the governance arrangements for the practice systems and processes required improvement and embedding to impact positively on patient experience.

The practice understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for patients. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. The practice worked with other practices within their primary care network (PCN) and attended meetings where practices shared best practice and quality improvement.

The practice collected patient feedback regularly via the NHS Friends and Family Test and reported on these outcomes each month. On an annual basis, the practice reviewed the National GP Patient Survey results and identified areas for improvement. Leaders told us they were actively working on improving overall patient satisfaction and trust and this formed part of their action plan. Actions included striving to ensure transparent communication with patients and introducing ‘micro-surveys’ to regular check in with patients about their experience of the service.

As part of this initiative, the practice had also produced a ‘You Said, We Did’ information article for patients where patient comments were heard and actions taken to address the concerns raised were listed.

In addition, the practice had a patient participation group (PPG) and staff had discussions with and collated feedback from the PPG to identify improvements for the practice on a monthly basis. Staff were positive about their engagement with the PPG and their assistance in suggesting changes to improve the service for patients. For example, in response to PPG feedback, a staff board with names and pictures of staff had been produced and displayed at reception; and a practice quarterly newsletter for patients had been developed.

The practice demonstrated a positive culture of learning and continuous improvement. Staff were encouraged to reflect on performance, learn from incidents and feedback, and identify opportunities to improve the quality and safety of services provided to patients. Leaders promoted an environment where learning was valued and staff felt supported to contribute ideas for improvement.

There were systems in place to review learning from significant events, complaints and patient feedback. Staff told us they discussed lessons learned at team meetings and used these opportunities to identify actions to reduce the likelihood of similar issues occurring in the future. Records demonstrated that learning was shared appropriately across the practice and improvements were implemented where required.

Staff participated in quality improvement activity to support better patient outcomes and service delivery. For example, the practice undertook clinical audits to monitor performance against local and national guidance. Where areas for improvement were identified, action plans were developed and progress was monitored to assess the impact of changes made.

The practice demonstrated a commitment to supporting staff development. Staff had access to training appropriate to their role and were encouraged to undertake professional development opportunities. Clinicians told us they kept up to date with changes in clinical guidance and best practice through training, peer discussion and participation in learning events.

The practice worked collaboratively with other organisations within the Primary Care Network (PCN) and wider healthcare system to share learning and identify opportunities for improvement. Staff attended meetings with partner organisations where performance, challenges and examples of good practice were discussed. This enabled the practice to learn from others and contribute to service development across the local health economy.

There was evidence that leaders used performance and patient feedback data to inform service improvements. Patient feedback was reviewed regularly and where themes were identified, actions were considered to improve patient experience. Staff were able to describe examples where changes had been made in response to patient feedback and operational learning. Whilst improvements to the service had been introduced, leaders acknowledged there were ongoing challenges with access, telephone performance, staff consistency, and clinical communication which would continue to be learned from and worked on. Leaders told us by focusing on these areas and communicating openly with patients about the improvements made, the practice strived to rebuild trust, improve satisfaction, and deliver a more positive experience for all patients.