Novum Health Partnership

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 a total of 7 quality statements from this key question. The rating for well-led at our last inspection was requires improvement. Following this assessment, this key question is now rated as good. We found leaders were visible and approachable. Staff felt supported by managers and GPs and were comfortable raising concerns. Although our assessment identified some improvements were needed, these areas had also been identified by the provider and action had been taken.

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 told us the practice had a clear vision for the future and were aware of the vision and values of the practice.

We found no concerns regarding processes for shared direction and culture.

Staff told us that leaders at all levels were visible and approachable. Leaders at the service told us that they worked closely with staff and others to make sure they prioritised compassionate and inclusive leadership.

There were clear lines of responsibility to support capable and inclusive leadership. The practice had put in place clear job descriptions and parameters for all staff and had ensured staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

Leaders at the service told us that the organisation considered it important that the voice of staff, service users and partner organisations could be heard. Staff told us that they felt comfortable raising concerns, and were confident that the leadership of the organisation would act on them.

There was a policy documenting how staff could raise concerns. This included details of the freedom to speak up guardian. Practice staff knew how to contact the freedom to speak up guardian.

Leaders told us that the service actively promoted equality and diversity. It identified and addressed the causes of any workforce inequality. Staff told us that they felt equality and diversity was respected by leaders and the service.

Staff had received equality and diversity training. The provider asked staff for their feedback through meetings and surveys. We saw evidence the provider reviewed survey responses and shared findings with staff, including future strategies.

Staff were clear on their roles and accountabilities including in respect of safeguarding and infection prevention and control. Leaders detailed and demonstrated that they had established proper policies, procedures and activities to ensure safety and assured themselves that they were operating as intended.

Our previous inspection in October 2023 found that improvements were required to the management of patients prescribed medicines requiring monitoring, people with long-term conditions, staff training and staff recruitment. At this assessment in September 2024 we found that improvements had been made. For example, staff recruitment files now contained details of staff immunisation status. We found some improvements were required in relation to the management of risks relating to: • Management of patients with long term conditions. • Staffing. • Staff training. • Uptake of childhood immunisations. • Uptake of cervical cancer screening. Prior to our assessment the provider had identified improvements were needed to management of long term conditions, staffing, uptake of childhood immunisations and uptake of cervical cancer screening. We saw evidence of action taken by the practice to reduce these risks. Improvements were still required in relation to staff training.

There was a patient participation group (PPG) who held meetings with practice managers approximately every 6 weeks. Feedback from the PPG was that the group felt listened to and action was taken based on their feedback. We heard the provider was open with patients and shared information where risks had been identified and improvements had been made as a result.

Leaders told us they collaborated with stakeholders and had active care meetings engaging with community healthcare providers. The service had a social prescriber to whom patients could be referred. Leaders told us that a full and diverse range of patients', staff and external partners' views and concerns were encouraged, heard and acted on to shape services and culture.

We had no concerns regarding partnership and communities.

There were effective processes for collaborating with patients, partner organisations and local community groups.

Staff told us they attended meetings and were given opportunity to raise concerns. We were told that significant events were shared with the team, but complaints and improvements made as a result were not always discussed with the wider team.

There were processes in place to collect feedback from patients and staff. We saw evidence the provider had made changes as a result of this feedback.