Marine Avenue 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 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 much better than the national average in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person, or through the service’s website. For example, 83% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, (the national average was 70%). The survey also showed that 88% 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 53%. On the day of our onsite assessment, we found that on the day appointments were still available to book with both GPs and nurses. 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 service, staff had made changes to improve access. This included the service changing their clinic times to match local bus services, which reduced waiting times for people.

Treatment rooms were located on the ground floor, with lift access to additional rooms on the first floor. A ramp and an automatic entrance door had been installed to ensure easy access to the building. The door could be operated both locally at the entrance and remotely by reception staff. Designated parking for people with mobility difficulties was situated adjacent to the main entrance.

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. For example, patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable such as those with a learning disability or dementia were offered appointments 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. We saw 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 service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers.

Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the National GP Patient Survey and Friends and Family 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.

There were currently no baby changing facilities at the practice as they were in the process of being replaced. Managers were proactively addressing this to restore the facilities as soon as possible.

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.