The Ash 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

Welookedforevidencetheservicemetpeople’sneeds,andstafftreatedpeopleequallyandwithoutdiscrimination.Atourlastassessment,weratedthiskeyquestionasgood. Atthisassessment,theratingremainsthesame.

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 ensured that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff enabled access to services when required, including arranging home visits for patients who needed them. The service had introduced a new total triage system in November 2025 to improve access and promote equity for all patients. Clinical staff triaged all requests submitted online or by telephone and made decisions about the care and treatment patients may receive. Since introducing the new system, the service had closely monitored patient access and identified improvements. These included reduced waiting times, better telephone access, more effective direction of patients to the most appropriate clinician, and greater protection of GP time for patients with complex needs. The service also provided staff with clear instructions and guidance on responding to patients who required reasonable adjustments, ensuring that triage processes remained inclusive for everyone.

The service maintained accessible premises and equipment and provided support to help people overcome barriers and ensure equal access. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor. Ramped access was provided to ensure ease of access to the premises.

People who used the service provided positive feedback with regards to their ability to access care and treatment. The service performed better than both local and national averages in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. For example, 86% of respondents described their overall experience of the service as good (compared to 69% nationally). In addition, 74% of respondents reported that it was easy to contact their GP practice by phone (compared to 52% nationally). The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who stated that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment was 98% (compared to 91% nationally).

Feedback shared with CQC from people using the service was very positive about their experience accessing appointments and services.

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. For example, patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable such as those with a learning disability or dementia were offered appointments at quieter times.

People who used the service had equal opportunities to access reviews of their care, treatment and medicines, this included health screening. The service had processes to ensure all people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances. Appointments were available outside of school and usual working hours. People could access appointments online, over the telephone and in person. Digital flags were used within the care records system to highlight any specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator to be present. The service had registers in place for people with a learning disability and annual checks were carried out to identify and address health issues early.

The provider monitored data about the care and treatment provided to patients. Available data showed that people experienced similar to or better outcomes for care and treatment when compared to services locally and nationally. The National GP Patient Survey and national Friends and Family Test feedback shared from people who used the service was positive. The results of the National GP Patient Survey indicated that 86% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of the practice (compared to 69% nationally).

Feedback shared directly with CQC showed that patients were satisfied with their experiences and services provided.

The service assessed health inequalities and the effectiveness of preventative care. It identified targeted engagement, auditing access, and maintaining a focus on early diagnosis as priorities and implemented measures to improve performance in these areas.

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.