The Jalal Practice

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 the service met people’s needs, and 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 79 (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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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

The service performed similar to national averages in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the service’s website.

A member of staff was the digital champion and offered drop in sessions so that people could learn how to use the NHS app and the practice’s on- line systems to contact the practice, make appointments and request prescriptions. 71% of people were now using the NHS app in their contact with the service.

In response to feedback from people who used the service, staff had made changes to improve access. This included total triage of all contacts with the surgery so that all requests were reviewed by a GP who prioritised patients with the most urgent needs and either offered a face to face or telephone appointment or signposted to other, appropriate services such as a pharmacy.

Staff used a system where all vulnerable people, such as the elderly, housebound people, those with certain health conditions such as cancer, military veterans and those whose first language was not English, were digitally flagged on the system and were regularly contacted by the practice as a welfare check to ensure that people’s needs were being met.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. For example, the practice worked in partnership with Doctors of the World UK and is a recognised Safe Surgery. This means they welcomed everyone, without discrimination, who wanted to use the service.

Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities.

The service was an accredited Military Veteran Friendly practice. This meant that the clinicians were trained to understand military health related conditions and provide priority treatment to the veterans.

Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.