Goodheart 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 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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had taken part alongside the PCN in the Care at Home Integrated Neighbourhood Teams pilot. They worked alongside the local authority with a social worker and social prescriber undertaking a joint visit to people receiving adult social care to offer holistic care centered around a joint health and social review. The social prescriber worked directly with the practice to escalate health needs and signpost to appropriate services.

The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community. For example, the practice had partnered with a local charity focussing on contraception and funded two of the PCN nurses to complete the long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) training to deliver this service to their patients in practice as the local service had a long waiting time.

The practice was proactive in encouraging uptake of cervical smears and childhood immunisations. They had commenced a project for the nurse to contact all patients who are overdue a cervical smear to offer counselling and to try to build up a relationship with the patient. They had also completed an outreach project where care coordinators contacted all families and explained value of immunisations.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes was available including in easy read formats. The practice had access to interpreter services. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made because of patient feedback, including complaints. For example, the new triage system was opened earlier due to some patients starting work before the 8am initial open time following patient feedback.

Feedback was sought in several ways including sending patients a link after their consultations to enable them to comment on the service received. The practice had received mostly positive feedback from the Friends and Family Test and the National GP Survey.

The complaint procedure was not available on the practice website. The manager explained the web site was recently new and she had not had chance to upload some of the additional data. This was addressed immediately after the assessment and the website now clearly shows how to make a complaint and how to escalate a complaint if no satisfactory response is received

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

In response to patient and staff feedback the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. The 2024 National GP survey data showed patient satisfaction with contacting the practice by phone as slightly below expected. In March 2025 they implemented a new online system to access appointments. Patients completed an online form to request an appointment this was then triaged by the reception manager, nurse or GP. Patients were then either invited for a face-to-face appointment, received a telephone appointment or were sign posted to a suitable service. Some patients commented they found it difficult not knowing when they would be called back or thought they may not be able to complete the forms. However, people could still access the service to suit their needs for example, in person and by telephone where they would be assisted by staff to complete the online form if required and the request would be then prioritised.

Treatment rooms were available on the first floor and there was lift access. An automatic door had been fitted to the entrance. Blue badge holder parking spaces, accessible toilets and bariatric seating were provided.

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

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. For example, they had engaged with the community learning disability team to assist with the annual learning disability reviews which provided shadowing and upskilling opportunities for the practice team. They had a dedicated outreach plan for females on the learning disability register who had not had or were due a cervical smear to provide extra information and offer at home smears to try and increase uptake in this vulnerable group. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary. The practice had a designated member of staff to assist palliative care patients and their carers. These patients and their carers were provided with a direct line contact number to this member of staff. End of life care plans were implemented and referrals to social prescribers for community support advice were completed.