Staveleigh 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

People could access care, treatment and support when they needed it. Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage groups of people who used the service and sought ways to address any barriers.

This service scored 82 (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 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. 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 70%. The survey also showed us that 83% of respondents had a positive experience when it came to contacting the GP Service, this compared to the national average of 70%. The survey asked people that used the service how easy it was to get in contact with the service on the telephone and 69% responded positively compared to the national average of 53%.
The provider made changes to clinical times to match local bus service timetables to help reduce the amount of time people spent waiting for an appointment.
Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance to ensure ease of access to the service.
The provider undertook an audit of patients that were using the service on a regular basis. These patients were invited in for longer appointments every 2 weeks. This then reduced the number of urgent appointments being taken which freed appointments for other service users who required on the day appointments. This helped to reduce the 8am rush to get an appointment by telephone or by completing the online form first thing in the morning.

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 treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience. Feedback from people who used the service was overwhelmingly positive, with people describing it as an “invaluable service”.
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 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.
The provider listened to individuals and discussed with them their specific needs. Treatment plans were put in place following discussions ensuring that individual choices remained at the heart of decisions being made.
We spoke to members of the neurodiverse Patient Participation Group (PPG) and they advised us that the provider worked closely with them and took on feedback and suggestions made and they felt that the provider “was like a sponge” wanting to know how best to support individuals that used the service that are on the autistic spectrum. Some of the suggestions implemented included the use of a patient handbook which outlined what patients can expect whilst visiting the practice and advising patients that they could use the toilet facilities without the fear of missing the appointment as the doctor would come out and call them through. Another suggestion taken on board was to use white envelopes instead of brown when communicating via letter, this reduced the anxiety of receiving bad news in the post which is often associated with brown envelopes. The neurodiverse PPG also suggested using sensory bags in the waiting area to help keep people's minds busy and to help reduce the anxiety of being in the doctor's surgery. This was implemented and the bags were in place in the waiting area to be used by any person visiting the service.
The main PPG met on a regular basis; this gave more service users the opportunity to speak with representatives from the provider and to ask pertinent questions and put suggestions forward on how to improve services.
 

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.