Birchwood Medical 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

We assessed 1 quality statement from this key question. We have combined the score for this area with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. 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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Leaders and managers supported staff, and all staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Managers met with staff regularly to complete appraisals and performance reviews. There was clear information about the key responsibilities of clinical and management leads for each area within the practice and staff told us they were aware of those with lead roles. Staff told us there were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management. They told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and who to contact should they need advice or want to discuss any concerns. The practice had an overall organisational chart which detailed practice governance arrangements. Information identifying lead roles was displayed clearly within the practice and staff were aware of those with lead roles, such as safeguarding, governance and performance. There were comprehensive assurance systems which were regularly reviewed and improved. Staff told us they could provide feedback and had opportunities to raise concerns or suggest new ideas to leaders and felt involved and listened to.

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. There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management and effective oversight of all areas. We reviewed a range of policies, which included for example, significant events, complaints and clinical supervision. There were clear processes to review, update and share changes with staff. The practice used digital services securely and effectively and conformed to relevant digital and information security standards with arrangements in place for the confidentiality of data management. The process for using clinical audits had a positive impact on quality, and there was evidence of an audit programme for continuous improvement. Staff used data to monitor and improve performance.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.