Northdown and Dashwood 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

Some people experienced difficulties accessing the service via the telephone. However, the service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training, feedback and increasing services they offered to support people. People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of people including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs.

People reported being involved in decisions about their care. The National GP Survey 2025 showed 89% of respondents stated they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. This was comparable with the local average of 90% and the national average of 91%.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community. For example, supporting people with dementia and their carers with health assessments, referrals to the memory clinic and signposting to the Dementia coffee morning held in partnership with community services. There were established and effective mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare services.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information to promote the uptake of screening and immunisation programmes was available in a range of languages. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. People were informed how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Results from the National GP Patient Survey 2025 found 83% of respondents reported the staff were very good or fairly good at listening to the patient. This was below the local average of 85% and the national average of 87%.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

People reported difficulties contacting the practice by telephone. Respondents to the National GP Patient Survey 2025 reported 29% found it easy to contact the practice on the telephone. This was below the local average of 44% and the national average of 53%. The service had taken action to improve by introducing an integrated online care platform to manage demand and direct appropriate queries away from the phone lines in order to free up capacity. Clinical triage was managed by a duty GP to support patient pathways and ensure people were routed to the most appropriate clinician for their needs. The service told us this prevented people from having to make unnecessary repeat calls. They told us that since implementation they had seen a 37% drop in call volume. In November 2025 the service conducted a survey of 530 people who had recently attended the service. Out of this patient group, 47% reported they found it easy to contact the service. However, the service had identified a recent increase in people contacting alternative care services such as NHS 111 during the service’s opening hours. They were looking to understand this trend.

The service offered extended appointments for people with a learning disability or those people who required translators. People could access the service to suit their needs for example, online, in person, and by telephone. All routes were triaged.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The practice had introduced a Care/Nursing Home Team focussed on supporting people vulnerable to hospital admissions. The service had identified a reduction of 38% in their accident and emergency admissions over the past six months and increased clinical capacity by reducing associated GP workload by 88%.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including in the voluntary sector, to address local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The service had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.