Stainland Road 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 practice 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 practice made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patients were able to book appointments in person, by telephone, and online. The practice offered a range of appointments which included face-to-face, telephone and video appointments, as well as home visits. Appointments were available for booking on the day, and in advance next day, 7-day, 14-day and 28-day. The practice also supported patients residing in 2 local care homes. Feedback from these homes was mixed citing good overall care, but noting some past issues with communication and prescribing.

The practice performed better than the national average in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey for questions regarding access to services. Results showed people could access the practice when they needed it, in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the practice’s website. For example, 67% of respondents to the survey found it easy to get through to the practice by phone compared to a local average of 51% and a national average of 53%. Results for ease of access using the practice website and NHS App were similarly above local and national averages. In addition, 82% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of the practice as good, which was significantly above the local average of 77% and the national average of 75%.

Physical accessibility into the practice was good, with disabled parking available, and powered access doors into the building. For those with other needs, such as a hearing impairment, we saw that the practice had a hearing loop, and was able to provide British Sign Language support via an interpretation and translation contract.

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, they understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in patients’ experience and outcomes. Processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances were in place. Staff supported those with additional needs, this included patients with language and communication needs. Other reasonable adjustments to support patients included longer appointments, home visits, and appointments at quieter times of the day for patients with a learning disability. The practice worked closely with other partners to provide care for some of their most vulnerable elderly patients, for example working with their primary care network to support frail patients in the community.

From our examination of training records, we saw that staff had undertaken mandatory training to better deliver services to vulnerable patients or those at risk of the impacts of health inequality. This included autism and learning disability awareness training, and equality training. At the time of our assessment the practice was working to attain the Pride in Practice award (a national accreditation programme for primary care services, which recognised their commitment to providing inclusive, safe, and respectful healthcare for LGBTQ+ patients).

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.