Lighthouse Group Practice

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 service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care.

We assessed one quality statement in the Well-led key question. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating had improved to Good.

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 Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

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. They act on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and share this securely with others when appropriate.

Following our previous assessment, the service had implemented a stronger governance framework with clear lines of accountability and improved systems for monitoring performance. Risks and performance measures were consistently reviewed and acted upon due to the employment of a dedicated HR officer and clearly defined reporting responsibilities of the service’s operations manager, quality lead and business partners.

Monthly reporting covered a wide range of performance areas including mandatory training, recruitment compliance, clinical audits, safeguarding, patient feedback and operational data. This enabled leaders to maintain oversight and ensure emerging risks were identified and addressed promptly.

Clinical governance had been strengthened through improved documentation and structured supervision arrangements. Staff confirmed they received regular appraisal and one-to-one support, and were encouraged to participate in audit, learning and improvement activities.

The leadership team had embedded processes for monitoring mandatory training and professional development. Staff were supported to access training opportunities, and compliance was routinely monitored and discussed at senior meetings.

Staff we spoke with felt confident in the leadership team and described a culture that was supportive, open and responsive. Governance arrangements had improved significantly, with evidence that the service was now operating within regulatory requirements and maintaining effective oversight of safety and quality.

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.