Branch End 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 the provider 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 provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider performed better than the national average in the results of the 2026 National GP Patient Survey. This 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 provider’s website. For example, 88% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this practice as being good, compared to a national average of 73%. The survey also showed that 92% of respondents were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone. This was significantly above the national average of 57%. On the day of our onsite assessment, we found that on the day appointments were still available to book with GPs. If more appointments were required, staff told us clinicians added in additional on the day appointments to meet any urgent demand.

In response to feedback from people who used the provider, staff had made changes to improve access. This included encouraging patients to use the NHS App for repeat prescriptions and patients booking their own appointments online for a routine GP appointment. Staff told us these changes had significantly reduced the volume of incoming calls, helping to keep telephone lines available for patients who needed to contact the practice directly.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic entrance door had been installed to support accessibility. Although some treatment rooms were located on the first floor, arrangements were made to move appointments to a ground-floor room whenever patients had mobility needs, ensuring they could access care safely and comfortably.

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. Staff proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. For example, patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable such as those with a learning disability or dementia were offered often longer appointments and at quieter times.

The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs and complex medical issues. Staff liaised regularly with community services to discuss and manage the needs of patients with complex medical issues.

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 practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers.

Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the practice, 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.

Information was available on the practice website on how to access an appointment online and by the telephone or in person when the practice was open, and how to access urgent care when the practice was closed.

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.