The Calverton Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care. The service supported staff wellbeing

This service scored 85 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Feedback from people who used the service was positive and staff at all levels were described as kind, understanding and helpful.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt listened to and were treated with care and concern. Both indicators were significantly above the national average. For example, 94% of respondents stated that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern. This was above the national average of 85%. In addition, 97% of respondents felt that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at listening to them, above the national average of 87%.

Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected that people felt involved in decisions about their care. For example, 97% of respondents stated that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. This was above the national average of 91%.

The service held a register of carers and had a dedicated carers’ champion who supported this group of people.

The practice were a veteran friendly practice with awareness of some of the specific needs of this cohort of patients.

We were told by the practice how they used a texting service and digital writing pads to enable effective communication with specific patients due to their needs.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.

The service had introduced a new telephone system and promoted the use of the online system for appointments and online consultations.

Home visits were undertaken to those housebound due to mental health issues as well as those with physical disabilities.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding. Representatives from the Patient Participation Group (PPG) felt the provider took concerns seriously and proactively made improvements to the service. Managers encouraged staff to raise concerns when things went wrong. The practice held learning event meetings when events including clinical issues were discussed and learnt from. Information was disseminated to those who were not present at the meeting. Staff felt there was an open culture, and that safety was a top priority. The provider had processes for staff to report incidents, near misses and safety events. There was a system to record and investigate complaints, and when things went wrong, staff apologised and gave people support. Learning from incidents and complaints resulted in changes that improved care for others. For example, following a complaint relating to a deceased patient the practice had added a pop-up box to patient records to identify more clearly when a patient had passed away.