Wood Lane Medical Centre

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

- The practice had good governance arrangements in place and staff were able to speak with us about their responsibilities. - Leaders were able to speak with us about the sustainability of the practice and future plans. - There were effective arrangements for identifying, managing, and mitigating risks identified.

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.

Interviews with staff and leaders demonstrated there were clear governance arrangements that supported staff to deliver quality care and treatment that was tailored to the needs of the local population. Staff we spoke with were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff also told us how and with whom they would raise feedback, suggestions, and concerns to when required. We were also told that that practice meetings were held monthly and these were attended by all practice staff. The GP partner we spoke with told us there had been significant increase of demand for services since our last inspection. This was because of the practice list had grown following the closure of another local practice. A business continuity plan was in place and the practice had two buddy practices, which could be used in the event of the practice building not being able to open. The continuity plan was kept updated and staff were aware of their role and responsibilities in case of disruptions.

There were mostly effective arrangements for identifying, managing, and mitigating risks. Policies, processes, and systems to support governance and management of the practice were managed by the GP partners and the practice management team. There were regular meetings during which issues significant to the delivery of clinical care and the general running of the practice was discussed and reviewed. However, as a result of our findings from the remote clinical records searches undertaken (highlighted within key questions safe and effective), the assessment team were not entirely assured that governance and systems in place at the practice ensured the timely delivery of quality care and treatment to patients. We also noted from the meeting minutes we viewed, that neither complaints or significant events appeared as a standing agenda item as part of the monthly practice meeting. There was evidence of quality assurance activity and clinical audits. The inspection team looked at the impact of two quality activity/audits in relation to improved patient outcomes, but we were unable to identify any improvements from the quality activity/audits provided. The practice succession plans had been activated due to the retirement one GP partner. Long term locum doctors had been employed to maintain the same level of clinical provision. Leaders told the inspection team that there were plans to recruit a salaried GP. The practice had a clear management structure in place with designated staff members who acted as leads for clinical and non-clinical areas. The practice used digital services securely and effectively and conformed to relevant digital and information security standards. There were clear arrangements in place for the availability, integrity and confidentiality of data, records, and data management systems.

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.