Dr P Kumar & Partners Also known as Chessington Park 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 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 82 (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 was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service performed better than the national average in the results of the 2026 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, 85% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, compared to a national average of 73%. The practice scored higher than local and national averages in a number of other areas in the National GP Patient Survey. 68%of respondents found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone, compared to a national average of 57%. 80%of respondents found it easy to contact this GP practice using their website, compared to a national average of 58%. 68%of respondents found it easy to contact this GP practice using the NHS App, compared to a national average of 54%. The practice reported they had amended opening hours to allow for earlier morning and later afternoon appointments, as well as keeping the practice open all day without closing for lunch. Nursing staff designated two morning per week for immunisation clinics. This dedicated time allowed for longer appointment lengths, meaning that parents had more time to settle their child after immunisation, and provided additional time for education and advice to be provided regarding the benefits of immunisations.

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 accommodate those of working age in full-time employment and those with school-age children. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor to ensure ease of access to the service.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment.

The practice had made extensive efforts to engage with those in hard-to-reach communities and has utilised initiatives that are unique and innovative. For example, the practice was aware of local Gypsy and Roma Traveller communities nearby. One of the practice staff was a member of this community and used their link between the service and this population group to encourage engagement with services (in particular, with mental health and childhood immunisations). The practice had engaged with work internally and well as in conjunction with the PCN to address the barriers to care which this group in particular may face, and in response devised several resources which were distributed amongst this community.

Based on patient feedback, the practice recognised that digital exclusion was a commonly recurring issue within their patient population. Over the past 2 years, staff at the practice had spent time educating and teaching patients how to use certain online services, and would offer to complete digital forms on behalf of patients.

The practice had maintained relations with a previous employee who had since commenced work at a learning disability charity. The arrangements had been set up so that for one day approximately every 4-6 weeks, the learning disability charity worker set up a drop in area for those looking for additional support, guidance or education. Signposting was given to local services within the area which could provide additional support, as well as free resources (e.g. blankets) being distributed. The practice had reported greater attendances at annual health checks for those with learning disabilities as a direct result of this. The practice proactively offered individuals to split their annual health check appointments if they so wished (for example, attending one appointment for a blood test and another later in the day if that best suited the patient’s needs).

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. 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.

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.