Archived: Eltham Palace Surgery

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 Requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 62 (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.

The National GP Patient Survey 2025 results for Eltham Palace Surgery showed lower than average satisfaction in patients being as involved as they wanted to be in decisions regarding their care and treatment (practice score: 82%, local average: 90%, national average: 91%).

We did not see evidence of complaints being recorded and addressed in a timely manner, nor did we see evidence of learning needs identified as a result. 62 complaints had been recorded since April 2025. 38 of 62 complaints remained open, some dating back to 8 April 2025.

We saw evidence of one complaint being discussed in the staff meeting minutes; however, this did not appear to be a standard agenda item. The practice advised that it held a standalone meeting for complaints, compliments and significant events. We saw 2 sets of meeting minutes from these for May and October 2025. Recording of learning points and actions was not consistent and it was not clear what steps had been taken to reduce the risk of the same issue happening again.

At this assessment, patients and staff reported access to appointments had improved. However, only 59% of patients who responded to the National GP Patient Survey in 2025 reported a good overall experience of contacting the practice (local average: 68%; national average: 70%).

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had reviewed access to the service. The review document stated that access data would be assessed regularly in clinical meetings. We did not see evidence of this.

People could access the service to suit their needs, for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor with level access from the street.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.