Tarbock 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 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 75 (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 was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service performed better than the national average in the results of the 2026 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. For example, 92% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, compared to a national average of 73%. With 85% (national average 57%) of people responding positively to ease of contacting the practice by telephone and 71% (national average 58%) finding it easy to contact the practice through the website. The survey also reported that 81% of people said that they felt they waited the right amount of time for their last appointment (national average 69%).

These results were mirrored in the Friends and Family feedback to the practice in the period of June – August 2026 with 98.7% of people (406 respondents) reporting that they would describe having a good or very good experience of the service. CQC received feedback from 195 people as part of this assessment with 189 (97%) indicating a very positive experience. This included positive feedback about ease of contacting the practice and timeliness of appointments.

We also met with members of the Patient Participation Group (PPG) who told us that access to services was timely, responsive and met people’s needs with staff going above what could be ordinarily expected of them to help patients get the care and treatment needed. They told us how they worked with the practice on a newsletter to inform people about access arrangements and the roles of the different healthcare professionals.

In response to feedback from people who used the service, staff had made changes to improve access. This included reviewing the appointment system and how staff were deployed to answer telephones.

The provider regularly reviewed the appointment system and staffing levels and skill mix. They had a system in place to ensure the most vulnerable and unwell patients were identified and had prompt access to the service.

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

Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience. 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. Alerts were placed on people’s records to identify their needs and how they were to be met, for example, by providing a longer appointment or a quiet area to sit whilst waiting for an appointment. The premises assisted people with their mobility, for example, there was level access for patients and designated parking spaces. Staff had completed training in equality, diversity, and inclusion.

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.