Calder View Surgery Also known as Calder View Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We have rated the practice as good for providing caring services as people were treated with kindness and compassion. Outcomes from the National GP Patient Survey (2025) were positive and above the national averages. Staff demonstrated how they protected patient privacy and dignity and treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. Staff were proud to work for the practice and spoke highly of its culture.

This service scored 80 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The practice treated patients with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff knew and understood their patients, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories and backgrounds. Patient feedback we reviewed indicated that staff were kind and empathic. In particular, the outcomes of the National GP Patient Survey had been consistently high and above national averages, and we saw further improvements had been made in the 2025 outcomes compared to 2024 in relation to kindness, compassion and dignity. We saw that 94% felt the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at listening to them (national average 87%), 97% had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to (national average 93%), 93% felt the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern (national average 86%) and 93% felt they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment (national average 91%).

There were policies and procedures in place for staff to follow to ensure information about patients was treated confidentially, as well as to respect their privacy. Staff who acted as a chaperone were aware of their responsibilities in maintaining a person’s dignity and safety during an intimate examination. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

On the day of our on-site visit, we observed that staff spoke with patients in a dignified and respectful manner. This was also reflected in the GP National Patient Survey where 94% found the reception and administrative team to be helpful (national average 83%).

The practice had systems and processes to ensure people’s communication needs were met, to enable them to engage in their care and treatment, and for them to be supported to maximise their experience and outcomes. Multi-disciplinary team meetings helped support vulnerable patients. These included those requiring end-of-life care and patients with safeguarding concerns. Staff were required to undertake specific training to improve their own knowledge and understanding of how to support different patients, for example equality and diversity, safeguarding, learning disability and autism.

There were systems and processes in place to promote patient’s independence and allow them control over their care and treatment. Patients were able to access appointments with a variety of clinical staff suitable to their needs. Patient information was available on the practice website which told patients how to access support groups and organisations. There was a Carer’s register and staff helped patients, and their carers, find further information and access community and advocacy services.

Staff we spoke with knew how to respond to patient’s immediate needs and how to recognise when urgent help or support was required. There was a system for appointment triage that ensured patients with immediate needs had access to services. This was supported by a daily duty doctor system. Staff were able to tell us about systems and training in place to support this, including the use of panic alarms, availability of emergency equipment and emergency management training. For example, basic life support and sepsis awareness. Leaders ensured that appropriate staff were always available throughout the day to support patients in case of an emergency.

The practice cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Feedback from staff was positive. They reported a good working environment and a positive culture. They told us they felt respected and valued, and that managers were supportive. Staff were positive in their reflections of working at the practice. Clinical staff felt supported on a day-to-day basis clinically by their peers and leaders.

There were systems and processes for staff to have regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences. These included meetings, appraisals and a staff survey.