Dr Samir Sadik

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 quality statements in this key question. At our last inspection the practice was rated inadequate in well led. This was because: - • The way the practice was led and managed did not promote the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care. • The overall governance arrangements were not effective. • There was a lack of leadership at the practice. • Arrangements for identifying, recording and managing risks, issues and mitigating actions were not effective. • Structures, processes and systems for accountability were not clearly set out or understood by staff. During this assessment, we found all the required improvements had been made. Our rating for this key question is good overall. We found the provider had clear and effective governance processes, which supported the safe delivery of care. Staff were clear on their individual responsibilities and knew who was accountable for each aspect of the service.

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.

Staff and leaders felt there was a clear vision for the future of the practice. Leaders and staff could demonstrate positive changes the practice had made, including developing a partnership and clearer responsibilities for non-clinical and clinical staff.

The provider had developed a mission statement, vision and values for their practice. These were shared with staff. The practice manager developed a monthly newsletter they shared with patients in the waiting room and on their website which detailed any news, updates and ‘did not attend’ figures.

Leaders had the experience, capacity, capability and integrity to ensure the practices’ vision could be delivered, and risks were well managed.

Since our last inspection, the provider had recruited an experienced practice manager and became a partnership. Staff told us they felt listened to and they were confident to raise any concerns with leaders. The leaders completed a staff health and wellbeing questionnaire in March 2024 which included questions about mental and physical health and wellbeing at work. Leaders could demonstrate that actions were taken following this survey, including purchasing new chairs for reception. We saw evidence staff appraisals were effective and completed appropriately. Staff commented that they were able to complete mandatory training. We saw evidence the provider had improved policies and procedures since our last inspection.

All staff were confident their voices would be heard. Staff knew who their freedom to speak up guardian was and how to contact them.

Staff and leaders actively promoted staff empowerment to drive improvement. They encouraged staff to raise concerns and promoted the value of doing so. The provider had a whistleblowing/freedom to speak up policy, this was due for review in August 2024. The policy included details on the procedure to raise concerns and the contact details for the freedom to speak up guardian in their area.

Leaders took steps to remove bias from practices to ensure equality of opportunity and experience for the workforce within their place of work, and throughout their employment.

The provider had an equality and diversity policy and all staff had completed equality and diversity training. Leaders completed ongoing review of policies and procedures to tackle structural and institutional discrimination and bias to achieve a fair culture for all.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff told us they were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities.

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 clearly recorded any actions arising from these meetings and ensured they shared these with staff. Staff took patient confidentiality and information security seriously. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews.

People from the patient participation group told us they were involved in developing the practice and suggesting improvements.

Staff and leaders engaged with people, communities and partners to share learning with each other that resulted in continuous improvements to the service, such as working with the primary care network. They used these networks to identify new or innovative ideas that could lead to better outcomes for people.

The provider worked closely with the Greater Manchester Integrated Care Board (ICB) following our last inspection with a compliance plan. The management team provided evidence to the ICB what improvements had been made. The ICB confirmed all actions were satisfactory, and the compliance plan was now closed.

The provider had developed an action plan for areas of improvement. This detailed a plan to re-establish the six weekly community healthcare MDT (multi-disciplinary team) meeting. The partners had attended a safeguarding conference to discuss individual cases, this was an MDT meeting.

Leaders told us they had moved patients to powder inhalers as part of a sustainability initiative.

The provider had received a gold award for excellence in LGBTQ+ healthcare. The practice was an armed forces veteran friendly accredited GP practice. Leaders had reviewed access at the practice and made plans to improve this, such as planning to get a new phone system that will enable them to review dropped calls and wait times. Improvements made to care provision as a result from complaints were shared in practice meetings.