Newington Road Surgery Limited Also known as Newington Road 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 assessed all 8 quality statements from this key question. Managers worked with its provider organisation to provide a stable leadership team. There was compassionate and inclusive leadership at all levels. Staff reported that leaders were visible and approachable. Leaders and managers demonstrated they understood the challenges to quality and sustainability. There were processes for managing risks, issues and performance. However, these were not always effective.

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.

An open and honest culture was reported, where staff felt comfortable raising concerns without fear of retribution. The safety and wellbeing of staff were highlighted as one of many priorities, with clear processes in place to address any behaviour that did not align with the practice’s vision and values. Staff also expressed confidence in the leadership’s efforts to create a more stable environment. They felt optimistic about the progress made and the solid foundation established for further improvements in patient care.

The practice had a clear vision and a credible strategy to deliver high-quality, sustainable care. This vision was supported by a strong, positive culture throughout the practice. Leaders demonstrated a thorough understanding of the challenges to maintaining quality and sustainability, and there were effective systems in place to monitor progress. Staff were aligned with the practice’s goals, and there was a shared sense of purpose across all levels. The leadership team fostered open communication, encouraging collaboration and input from all staff members. This approach reinforced a cohesive and supportive environment, where continuous improvement was valued. Staff were engaged in the vision and felt empowered to contribute to its success.

Staff provided positive feedback regarding the leadership within the practice, noting that both clinical staff and management were visible, approachable and supportive. The working environment and relationships between staff and management were described as positive, with a strong sense of teamwork and cohesion across the practice. Staff shared examples of instances where leaders listened to their feedback and implemented changes as a result.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities within the practice. A well-defined leadership structure was in place. There was evidence of effective information-sharing regarding complaints, significant events, and safeguarding, enabling continuous learning and improvement.

Staff reported that the practice fostered an open and honest culture, where they felt comfortable raising concerns about the management team and leadership. They also confirmed they had access to a freedom to speak up guardian, were aware of who to contact and said they were confident in raising concerns if needed.

The practice had processes in place to support staff in speaking up. Staff were aware of these procedures and policies designed to encourage openness and transparency. The practice fostered a positive culture where staff felt their voices would be heard and concerns could be raised without fear of repercussions. The availability of a freedom to speak up guardian further reinforced this environment, ensuring staff had a designated point of contact for raising any issues.

Staff reported feeling supported by practice leaders and their peers. They provided examples of the support they had received, including access to learning and development opportunities that contributed to their professional growth. Staff highlighted that the practice promoted a culture of equality, diversity and inclusion.

The practice had established systems and processes to define responsibilities, roles and accountability structures that supported the workforce. This included human resources support. Staff and leaders had completed equality and diversity training, reinforcing the practice’s commitment to creating an inclusive and supportive work environment.

Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities within the practice. They were knowledgeable about how to access relevant policies and procedures. Additionally, staff reported they were given protected time to complete required training, ensuring they could meet their professional development needs effectively.

The provider continued to implement and embed the governance processes we saw at the last inspection. A key initiative was the “Model Day” programme which encompassed all aspects of day-to-day service delivery. This programme enables senior leaders to maintain oversight of critical operational tasks, ensuring essential activities are completed in a timely and organised manner. Key areas of oversight included ensuring fire safety routes remained clear and compliant, regular review and actioning of pending tasks, review and processing test results, completion of urgent two week wait referrals within 24 hours, timely authorisations of prescriptions. The “Model Day” programme was designed to support staff in fulfilling their roles effectively and to ensure that all requirements for service delivery were consistently met. In situations where a high volume of outstanding tasks was identified, and onsite resources were insufficient, senior leaders requested additional support from head office. Remote staff would then be deployed to assist with the completion of tasks, ensuring that operational efficiency is maintained. Our assessment identified that improvements were required in the management of risks. These included the monitoring of patients with long term conditions, management of medicines that require regular monitoring, responding to safety alerts, monitoring for legionella, conducting clinical audits and the recording of complaints. In relation to legionella monitoring and complaint handling, the practice did not follow the processes outlined in their policies.

The practice engaged and sought feedback from patients via surveys. At the time of our assessment, the practice was in the process of establishing a Patient Participation Group (PPG).

The practice demonstrated an understanding of their duty to collaborate and work in partnership to ensure services function effectively for people. We found staff and leaders were open and transparent, and they told us they collaborated with all relevant external stakeholders and agencies. They also told us their commitment to sharing information and learning with partners to foster continuous improvement.

Following our last inspection, the commissioners of the service, NHS Kent and Medway integrated care board (ICB) collaborated with the provider to address and enhance the areas identified for improvement. The provider demonstrated good engagement although there were instances where follow up was required.

The practice worked together with 4 other GP practices within the Ramsgate Primary Care Network (PCN) and linked with social prescribers. The practice demonstrated effective working relationships within the PCN, notably through the utilisation of additional staff provided by the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme and by attending regular meetings to share and learn information for continuous improvement. Leaders also attended meetings with other practice managers in the area to discuss learning and quality improvement initiatives. Additionally, the practice collaborated closely with another practice to improve the practice capacity and demand management, as well as to enhance employee well-being and staff turnover rates. Regular meetings were also held with partner organisations, including care homes, to ensure the safe and effective delivery of services.

Leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of the needs of the practice’s local population, including its demographics and the challenges faced. They shared insights into their plans for improving services to better meet these needs. Significant events were used to make improvements. The provider told us that learning from significant events was shared with staff; documents we viewed and staff we spoke with confirmed this. Staff we spoke with told us management always encouraged them to develop professionally with courses and training. At the time of our assessment, the practice did not have an established Patient Participation Group (PPG) however staff told us that efforts were underway to establish one.

The practice had systems and processes in place to support learning, continuous improvement and innovation. We observed evidence of supervision, appraisal and staff training. Although the practice did not have a formal program of repeat cycle audits, they indicated this was an area that would improve, now that permanent GPs had been employed. Additionally, we identified the need for improvements in recording complaints to enable trend monitoring and drive quality improvements. This aspect did not fully comply with the practice’s policy.