Earl's Court Surgery

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 inspection, we rated this key question as good. At this inspection, 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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues with kindness and respect.

The National GP Patient Survey (2025) results indicated that people were treated with kindness. Results showed that 88% reported that the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment (compared to 86% nationally). People who commented as part of this assessment described the staff team as helpful and kind. We received positive comments about the way the GPs, the nurse and the reception team treated people.

The service was clear about their duty to respect people’s privacy 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.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences.

People’s personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. People’s communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. The National GP Patient Survey (2025) showed that 93% of respondents at this service reported that their needs were met during their last appointment. This compared to 90% for this indicator nationally.

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 people and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services. For example, if they needed assistance in making a complaint. Several people who commented on their experience of the service for this assessment, said they were able to see their preferred GP and this gave them confidence in their care.

The service listened to and understood people’s immediate needs. 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. The staff team had the capacity to see people with immediate primary care needs the same day. The reception team had a clear written guide for reference. We saw that people were being directed to an appropriate healthcare professional for their needs.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks. The service demonstrated flexibility when staff requested adjustments to their working pattern, for example to accommodate caring responsibilities.