Lower Farm Health Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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 Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.
Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.
Their social prescriber supported local community groups, such as cancer awareness. People could access a wide range of healthcare professionals such as dietician, physiotherapist and mental health practitioner through the Walsall Primary Care Network (PCN).
 

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves. There was a programme of regular clinical audit that focused on improving patient outcomes. For example, they had completed an audit of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), took action to address monitoring needs, and had implemented a system for ongoing management of COPD and reducing the need for ‘rescue’ inhalers.
Data for 2024/2025 showed that the health centre was not achieving the expected targets for all 5 areas of childhood immunisations and cervical screening. For example, for cervical cancer screening the health centre achieved an uptake of 75% in the younger age indicator and 77% in the older age indicator, below the 80% target. Clinical staff told us they continued to promote uptake of this screening. During the assessment, we reviewed a recent action plan which outlined the measures the health centre took to implement and improve uptake rates during 2025/2026. The health centre had been working collaboratively with the Healthy Child Programme and had established joint working arrangements with Chase medical health centre to support improvements in childhood immunisation uptake. The action plan also demonstrated a proactive approach to increasing participation in screening programmes through targeted people engagement and recall processes.
The health centre completed regular audits to ensure care was provided for people who required regular monitoring or were prescribed high risk medicines. The outcomes of the audits were discussed at clinical and health centre meetings and learning was shared.
 

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.