Padiham Group Practice

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

The service performed below the national average in the results of the 2026 National GP Patient Survey. For example, 64% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, compared to a national average of 73%. Also, 49% of respondents said it was easy to contact the practice by telephone (national average 57%) and 43% said it was easy to contact the practice using the website (national average 58%). However, during the assessment we saw good availability of appointments. The service had recently moved to a total triage system, where a clinician determined that requests for appointments were clinically prioritised. We could see that this had a positive effect on the number of telephone calls received, especially at peak times, and patients were able to contact the service at any time, not just early each morning. The evidence we saw showed that the new triage system was making a difference to the ease of access to the service.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and there was level access and an automatic door to the entrance to ensure ease of access to the service.

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. Leaders 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. Following a change to a total triage system to access appointments, the service had a system in place to ensure patients who were unable to access systems digitally were not discriminated against. We saw reception staff following this system during the assessment. 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 service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Translation services were available. Staff had completed training in equality, diversity and human rights.

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.