A&R Priority Healthcare Head Office

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 looked for evidence that service’s leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights. The leadership worked closely together to ensure they had a shared vision and understanding of their service and its future.

Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

There was no system or relevant policy for how to escalate concerns about a clinician’s conduct. The provider’s speaking up policy did not include relevant guidance and legislation.

The two members of staff worked closely with each other. They participated in their service design and evolution collectively.

The service did not always have clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability or good governance. There was a lack of service specific process, policy and risk assessment related to their own provision of care in the settings it was delivered. Therefore, they did not always act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, or share this securely with others when appropriate.

The service sought feedback from their patients, NHS GP services and social care services about their delivery of their care. They used this feedback to develop and improve.

The service had limited focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement. They had undertaken some clinical audit but this was limited to two peer review sessions with each clinician’s work and an antibiotic audit. The provider was proactive in taking action to improve when they received feedback. However, there was a lack of internal process to independently identify and make improvements to their care. This was demonstrated in some clinical records lacking checks and background information in some cases.