Oakwood 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 75 (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. Staff and leaders understood the challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The provider reviewed the service’s vision and strategy with the staff team annually. Leaders monitored and reviewed progress against the delivery of their strategy. The service was aware of challenges which affected their service, such as maintaining the right skill mix of staff to meet the needs of patients and worked with partner agencies 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. Staff told us there was good teamwork, they felt valued and supported by leaders and they could contribute to decision making about how the service operated.

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 and systems of accountability. There were systems and processes to promote effective governance.

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. The provider had established governance processes in relation to the quality statements we reviewed during this assessment, which were overall appropriate for their service. The system to monitor recruitment records to ensure written references were consistently obtained needed improvement.

Staff could access all required policies and procedures, which were kept up to date to ensure they reflected the latest guidance. Leaders held regular meetings with staff, during which they discussed emerging risks and potential improvements to the service. Staff took confidentiality and information security seriously, which included verifying people’s identity during remote consultations. Staff submitted data and notifications to external agencies as required.

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.