Essington 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

We looked for evidence 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 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.

Not all staff had had the opportunity to contribute to the development of the service’s vision and strategy, but those staff we spoke with were aware of the practice vision. The service was aware of local challenges which affected their service and worked with partner agencies to identify additional services to address these challenges. Staff and leaders actively promoted equality and diversity and worked to identify the causes of any workforce inequalities. They demonstrated a positive and compassionate listening culture that focused on learning and development. Leaders described the culture of the service as open and engaging which was reflective of the discussions we held with staff. Staff told us they felt supported to raise any concerns both professionally and personally which they knew would be listened to and acted on.

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 clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. Although they acted on the best information about performance and outcomes, not all risks were identified and managed appropriately.

All staff we spoke with were clear on their individual roles and responsibilities. Leaders proactively supported staff and regularly met with them to complete appraisals and performance reviews. The provider had established governance processes in relation to the quality statements we reviewed during this assessment, which were appropriate for their service. However, we found that not all potential risks had been identified, assessed or action taken to mitigate the risk.

Staff could access all required policies and procedures, which were kept up to date and reflected latest guidance. Leaders held regular meetings with staff, during which they discussed emerging risks and potential improvements to the service.

The service currently did not have an active patient participation group (PPG) to represent the voice of people using the service but were actively taking steps to re-establish a PPG to help improve service delivery.

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.