The Amwell

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to
good governance. Improvements were found at this assessment, and the provider was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 61 (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 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.

The provider continued to improve responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance.

Governance processes had continued to be developed and strengthened. The registered manager carried out regular reviews and audits across key areas of the service, including medicines management, accidents and incidents, and people’s health outcomes. In addition, the provider completed oversight checks to monitor the quality of the service and ensure people’s needs were being met.

While we identified some areas for improvement, these were already recognised by the provider through their governance systems. Action plans had been implemented to address these issues, demonstrating that processes were more effective in identifying concerns and driving improvement. However, these systems required further embedding to ensure improvements were consistently sustained over time.

Action continued to be taken following the last assessment to improve records relating to people’s care and support needs, staff training and accidents and incidents. More detail was now captured, and included recurring themes and lessons learned.

Communication between managers and staff was continuing to improve. Important information about changes in people's care needs were communicated to staff effectively. One visiting health care professional told us, “During a recent visit, I saw [registered manager] was going through the MDT [multi-disciplinary team meeting] findings with staff to make sure things were actioned.”

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.