Dr Girija Kugapala Also known as E12 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 made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patient survey results showed people were able to access the practice when they needed to. Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey were positive, with 71% of respondents finding it easy to contact the practice by phone, compared with 53% nationally. In addition, 76% of patients reported a positive overall experience of contacting the practice, compared with 53% nationally. The positive trend was also reflected in the 2026 results; 75% of patients reported they were offered a choice of time or day when they last tried to make an appointment, compared with 57% nationally, and 81% felt they waited about the right amount of time for their last appointment, compared with 69% nationally.

A triage system was in place to help ensure patients were directed to the most appropriate service based on urgency and need. A range of appointment types were available, including face-to-face, telephone, and home visits were provided for those housebound or clinically too unwell to attend the surgery.

The practice regularly reviewed access data, including patient survey feedback, telephone system data and appointment demand, to identify and address barriers to accessing care. Appointment capacity was adjusted in response to demand, including ensuring same-day or next working day appointments were available for patients with more urgent needs.

Staff made reasonable adjustments to support individual patient needs, including the involvement of carers and advocates where appropriate. Interpreter services, including British Sign Language (BSL) and a hearing loop were available. Longer appointments were also available where appropriate to support patients with additional communication or access needs, including for people with learning disabilities, autism, dementia or mental health conditions. The premises were accessible, with ramp or step-free access and accessible toilet facilities. A private room was available for patients who required additional privacy, including breastfeeding mothers. The practice also had arrangements to support registration for people in vulnerable circumstances, including homeless people and travellers. All staff were trained in equality and diversity.

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.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, to address any local health inequalities.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Patients’ individual needs and protected characteristics were considered when planning care. The practice tailored its services to meet the needs of its diverse local population, including a large Tamil-speaking community and for patients with long-term conditions. Staff ensured inclusion in respect of patients’ cultural, religious, and personal preferences. The practice provided targeted health education, including diabetes and heart health sessions, and it offered culturally sensitive care such as support for patients fasting during Ramadan.

Patient experience feedback was consistently positive across the practice unverified Friends and Family Test (FFT) data from February to April 2026. This data showed that none of the 151 respondents rated their experience as “neither good nor poor, poor, or very poor. Of the responses received, 119 patients rated their experience as very good, and 32 rated their experience as good, indicating consistently positive experiences or outcomes of care and treatment at the practice.

The practice was also Veteran Friendly accredited, and was working towards becoming Dementia and LGBTQ+ friendly status or accreditation.

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.