Great Barr Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to Good.

At the previous assessment we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing caring services as patient feedback was negative in response to the care they received. At this assessment we found people we spoke with were happy with the care they received; this was also reflected in the national patient survey where the practice had improved scores for a range of indicators in relation to accessing care and the overall experience of the GP practice. Staff we spoke with demonstrated the values of the practice and dealt with patients with kindness, respect, and compassion. Interactions we observed between staff and patients, showed that staff listened to patients and treated them with kindness.

People who used the service were supported to make decisions about their future care. Information about how to raise a complaint was provided to people. The provider understood their patient population and they identified and made changes to improve their service where required. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and outcomes. The provider worked within the Primary Pare Network (PCN) and supported local service developments. Continuity of care was offered to patients where required or when patients requested consultations with specific clinicians. The provider made reasonable adjustments to ensure the premises were accessible to patients who required disabled access.

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

At the last assessment in November 2024, we found feedback from the GP national patient survey of 2024 showed negative feedback from people on a number of areas and the practice were unable to demonstrate an effective plan was in place to improve patient satisfaction. Following this assessment the latest results of the GP National Patient survey for 2025 were published which showed some improvements in patient satisfaction scores. For example: The 2025 results showed 69% of people found the reception and administrative team helpful, in comparison to the national average of 83%. This was a 9% increase on the 2024 results and a 32% increase from the 2023 results. To further engage with people who used the practice, an inhouse survey had been carried out during March 2025. A total of 225 patients had completed the survey which showed 77.8% of patients found the reception staff helpful.

Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. A hearing loop was in place to support patients who had hearing difficulties.

The practice had recently registered as an accredited Safe Surgery. Becoming a Safe Surgery demonstrated the practice was taking steps to reduce barriers to healthcare access regardless of immigration status.

Resources were available such as language line to support patients who did not have English as a first language. Staff we spoke with were aware of the needs of the practice’s population and gave us examples on how they supported patients. For example, appointments were offered at different times of the day to suit people's needs.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services. The practice had access to a social prescriber through the primary care network who provided support and information on local services within the community. The people we spoke with on the day of the onsite assessment told us they felt included in decisions about their care and treatment.

The practice held a range of registers to identify people who may need extra support. For example: learning disabilities. Alerts were added to clinical records to inform staff of any support a person may need.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support. A duty doctor was available to provide support to staff and deal with urgent enquiries.

Following the last assessment, the provider had increased the leadership team, which included clinical staff to provide more services to the practice population. The practice had access to a range of clinical services through the Primary Care Network (PCN) which included pharmacists and physiotherapists.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff; however, we found systems needed strengthening to ensure staff had the appropriate knowledge, qualifications and competencies to always deliver person-centred care. A review had been completed of staff competencies following the last assessment in November 2024; however we still found some staff were still carrying out roles, which were not appropriate for them to be undertaking and they were unable to demonstrate appropriate knowledge and awareness of clinical guidance.

Staff told us they felt valued by the leadership team. We spoke with a range of staff on the day and found staff were positive about working at the practice and the support they received. Staff told us that they had been well supported when needed and adjustments had been made when required to ensure that staff were able to do their role effectively. The provider had increased the leadership team and staff said that a range of processes were now in place which contributed to a positive working environment. A staff survey had recently been completed, to determine how staff felt about working at the practice, their workload and if they felt able to ask for support. The results of the survey showed 75% of staff felt supported by management and 69% of staff were enthusiastic about their job role. An action plan had been implemented to improve staff satisfaction. This included launching a staff recognition programme, a review of job descriptions and monthly structured team meetings. At the time of the assessment, we found these actions had been implemented and staff told us communication had significantly improved.