Barrow Health 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

We looked for evidence that the service’s leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care and promoted an open and fair culture. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 71 (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, human rights, diversity, inclusion and engagement. Staff and leaders understood the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.
Staff and leaders demonstrated a shared commitment to delivering high-quality care and improving outcomes for patients. Leaders understood the needs of the local population and used this understanding when planning and developing services.
The service promoted a culture of openness, learning and continuous improvement. Staff told us they felt supported within their roles and were able to raise concerns, provide feedback and contribute to improvements within the service.
Equality, diversity and inclusion were actively promoted, and staff demonstrated awareness of the importance of providing fair and equitable care to all patients.
 

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 service had governance processes in place to support the delivery of care and treatment. However, information reviewed as part of this assessment did not always provide assurance that governance arrangements were operating effectively to identify and address issues relating to medicines monitoring, documentation and follow-up arrangements.
Staff understood their individual roles and responsibilities and told us they felt supported by leaders. Policies, procedures, audits and performance monitoring systems supported the effective delivery of care.
Clinical searches undertaken as part of the assessment identified inconsistencies in medicines monitoring, documentation and follow-up arrangements. The service undertook a comprehensive review of the findings and demonstrated that appropriate clinical management had already taken place in many cases. Leaders reviewed individual patient records, completed outstanding monitoring, strengthened recall systems, reviewed prescribing arrangements and shared learning through governance processes and practice-wide communications.
The service developed a detailed action plan covering medicines monitoring, long-term condition management, documentation standards, asthma follow-up and diabetes monitoring, with named ownership and timescales for completion. The clinical review concluded that there was no evidence of widespread prescribing or patient safety concerns. However, the findings highlighted that governance systems had not always identified and addressed these issues before they were highlighted through the assessment process.
Leaders responded positively to the findings and implemented additional governance measures, monitoring arrangements and practice-wide learning to strengthen oversight and support continuous improvement. Leaders maintained oversight of quality and safety through regular meetings, audits, risk assessments and governance processes. Action plans developed following the clinical review demonstrated clear ownership, monitoring arrangements and timescales for completion.

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.