Gorton Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The practice worked collaboratively with other healthcare providers to ensure people's care was coordinated and joined up. Information was shared appropriately with secondary care, out-of-hours providers and community services to support continuity of care. Staff described regular multidisciplinary meetings where patients with complex needs, safeguarding concerns and long-term conditions were discussed. Leaders told us continuity of care was important and patients we spoke with valued being able to see the same GP.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Patients were provided with information in ways that met their needs. Interpreter services were available and the practice website could be accessed in different languages. Information about services, including chaperones and complaints procedures, was available within the practice. Staff supported patients who were unable to access online systems and ensured alternative routes remained available for accessing care and advice. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Complaints were managed through established processes and records demonstrated that complaints were acknowledged, investigated and discussed within practice meetings. The practice monitored feedback through the Friends and Family Test and patient surveys. Data from the Friends and Family test showed an average of 87.8% of patients that rated the practice positively between the months of August 2025 and June 2026.

Following feedback relating to access, continuity and communication, the practice implemented several changes. The practice introduced a total triage model which reduced routine appointment waiting times from approximately 6 weeks to around 10 days. To improve continuity of care, all patients were allocated a named GP and the practice moved towards a salaried GP workforce rather than relying on locum clinicians. Patients could also request appointments with their preferred GP where appropriate.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, appointment capacity had been adjusted to provide more appointments before work and after school, and patients could access evening and weekend appointments through the Enhanced Access Service.

CQC received 61 comments from patients and 52 of these were positive. Patients told us that the service delivers good care, staff were helpful and always treated with respect. Some of the negative comments related to accessing appointments.

In response to patient concerns about telephone access, the practice invested in a new telephony system designed to improve call handling, provide automated cancellation options and support digital access. The practice had also commissioned a new website to improve access to information and services.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The practice recognised that different groups of patients may experience barriers to achieving positive health outcomes and had taken action to address these. Patients were allocated a named GP and could request their preferred clinician where appropriate, supporting continuity of care and patient experience. The practice also employed a social prescriber and increased signposting to local health and wellbeing initiatives to support patients in addressing wider factors affecting their health.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.