Bevan Group Practice

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

Well-led – this means 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 assessed all the quality statements in this key question and the service has been rated good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led.

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.

Leaders ensured there was a shared vision and mission statement that staff in all areas knew, understood and supported. Leaders demonstrated a positive, compassionate and listening culture and staff told us that equality and diversity were actively promoted, and if concerns were raised, action was taken to address these.

Leaders had the experience, capacity, capability and integrity to ensure the organisational vision could be delivered. The service had undergone several management changes and at the time of assessment, some managers were still developing their roles. Staff told us managers and partners were visible and open-door policies were in place for when staff needed support. Managers were knowledgeable about issues and priorities for the quality of services and could access appropriate support and development in their role. Leaders were alert to any examples of poor culture that may affect the quality of people’s care and have a detrimental impact on staff and they addressed any concerns quickly.

Staff and leaders acted with openness, honesty and transparency. Leaders encouraged staff to raise concerns and promoted the value of doing so. There was a culture of speaking up, where staff actively raised concerns, and those who did were supported without fear of detriment. When concerns were raised, leaders investigated them sensitively and confidentially, and any lessons learnt were shared and acted on. We received a high number of completed CQC staff feedback forms and all staff felt supported and confident to raise concerns.

Leaders acted to remove bias from practices to ensure equality of opportunity and experience for staff. Leaders supported staff who had protected equality characteristics, or those from excluded and marginalised groups, and monitored any interventions to evaluate their impact. Leaders acted to prevent and address bullying and harassment. The provider made reasonable adjustments to support disabled staff to carry out their roles well.

There were clear and effective governance, management and accountability arrangements. Staff understood their lead role and responsibilities, for example lead clinical roles. We found that any performance issues were escalated appropriately through clear structures and processes. Staff appraisals were used to manage staff performance. Systems to manage current and future performance and risks were established and closely monitored. The management team used data to monitor and improve performance. For example, practice meetings were held, and discussions took place about performance and operational pressures. Any audits results were discussed in daily and weekly clinical meetings. Staff were aware of data or notifications that needed to be submitted to external organisations as required.

Staff and leaders were open and transparent, and they collaborated with all relevant external stakeholders and agencies. Staff and leaders worked in partnership with key organisations to support care provision, service development and joined-up care. Staff and leaders engaged with people, communities and partners to share learning with each other to promote continuous improvement to services.

There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels across the service. For example, the service was a GP trainee practice and there were daily clinical meetings to discuss cases and best practice. Leaders encouraged reflection and collective problem-solving, and there were processes to ensure that learning happened when things went wrong, and from examples of good practice. Staff were supported to prioritise time to develop their skills around improvement and innovation. Leaders encouraged staff to speak up with ideas for improvement and innovation and actively invested time to listen and engage. Staff and leaders had strong external relationships that supported improvement and innovation. Staff and leaders engaged with external partners, including research, and embedded evidence-based practice in their service.