Eve Hill Medical 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 that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to Good.

This service scored 86 (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.

The practice demonstrated a strong commitment to continuity and quality of care through clearly documented and personalised approaches. Continuity of care flags had been applied to 74 patient records, providing clear guidance on the appropriate clinician to support consistent care delivery.

Standard consultation times of 15–20 minutes enabled meaningful patient engagement and supported holistic assessments. Care plans reflected patients’ physical, mental, emotional and social needs, including those relating to protected characteristics under the Equality Act.

Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey demonstrated that 94% of respondents felt they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last practice appointment which was higher than the local average of 90% and the national average of 91%. In addition, 97%had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to during their last general practice appointment which was higher than the local average of 91% and national average of 93%.

The practice demonstrated a proactive approach to person-centred care by addressing digital inclusion, improving identification of vulnerable groups, and tailoring support to individual needs. A comprehensive digital inclusion policy was in place, supported by dedicated Digital Inclusion Champions who assisted patients with accessing and using digital services such as the NHS App, online forms, and messaging systems. Practical support included the provision of free SIM cards through the Good Things Foundation National Databank, referral pathways for patients requiring access to digital devices, and signposting to local digital literacy initiatives. This was further strengthened through the introduction of coding to identify patients experiencing digital inequality, with evidence that 140 patients were recorded to date. This enabled the practice to implement reasonable adjustments and ensure patients were not disadvantaged by digital first models of care, improving access, engagement and confidence.

The practice also demonstrated a strong commitment to inclusion through significantly improving the identification and support of military veterans, increasing numbers from 6 to 98. This was achieved through an appointed veteran champion, staff training, proactive patient engagement, improved digital resources, and visible in practice awareness, ensuring patients could access appropriate, tailored support. In addition, the practice worked in partnership with Integrated Plus to deliver a targeted social prescribing intervention for frequent attenders. Patients received holistic, personalised support addressing wider determinants of health, including mental health, financial advice, housing, and community engagement. This resulted in a 22% reduction in acute appointments within 3 months for those who engaged, demonstrating improved outcomes and reduced demand on GP services.

Environmental adaptations had been thoughtfully considered and implemented to support a more inclusive and welcoming environment. This included the introduction of a sensory box to support patients with sensory or communication needs. In addition, child friendly features had been incorporated, such as privacy screens displaying familiar “Mr Men” characters, helping to create a more engaging and reassuring environment for younger patients.

The service had an exceptional understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Care pathways were proactively designed to address patients’ social, mental and physical health needs from the first point of contact, with structured follow-up arrangements in place to ensure continuity and sustained support. This approach reflected a shared journey between staff and patients, underpinned by strong collaboration across services. Staff took consistent and proactive steps to coordinate care, aligning resources and interventions to achieve the best possible outcomes for each individual.

The practice worked highly effectively in partnership with other services and had well established mechanisms to engage with community healthcare providers. This included formally seeking feedback from partner organisations to support continuous learning and drive service improvement. Strong relationships with community groups, stakeholders and neighbouring practices enabled the sharing of best practice and contributed to improved outcomes across the wider system.

Continuity and consistency of care were further strengthened by a stable clinical team, with minimal reliance on locum staff. The practice had developed strong, trusting relationships with multidisciplinary professionals, and staff were familiar with patients who regularly attended the practice, enabling more personalised and responsive care. A review of clinical systems showed that referrals were made promptly, and information received from other services was managed effectively and in a timely way, supporting safe and well-coordinated care.

Services were tailored to meet the diverse needs of the local population, with a clear focus on reducing barriers to access. The practice made appropriate reasonable adjustments for patients requiring additional support, including access to translation services, and demonstrated full compliance with the Accessible Information Standard. This ensured patients received information in a way they could understand, promoting inclusivity and equitable access to care.

The service was exceptional at developing appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The practice ensured patients were well informed and supported through a variety of accessible communication methods, including a regular practice newsletter available in easy read format, an up-to-date website, a social media page and a text messaging service. A dedicated wellbeing page on the practice website provided signposting to a wide range of national and local support services. These included resources for carers, child health, elderly care, maternity services, veteran support, drug and alcohol services, sexual health, smoking cessation, weight management, pain management, and LGBTQIA+ support.

Information promoting the uptake of screening and immunisation programmes was readily available. The waiting area provided a wide range of health and wellbeing resources, including leaflets, posters and display boards covering key topics such as the Patient Participation Group, ‘You Said, We Did’ feedback, Safeguarding, Veteran support, the NHS App and LGBTQIA+ inclusion. The practice advised that notice boards were rotated on a 6 monthly basis to ensure patients had access to a broad range of up-to-date information.

The practice demonstrated a strong commitment to accessibility and inclusion. Interpreter services, including British Sign Language, were available, a hearing loop was available, and patients were supported to understand how to access their care records.

The practice identified 140 patients as experiencing digital inequality. To further reduce digital barriers, the practice offered a dedicated digital clinic where patients could receive support to set up and use digital tools such as the NHS App.

Reception staff were trained in care navigation and were able to signpost and refer patients to 37 local services, enabling access to a wide range of support beyond general practice and ensuring a more holistic, person-centred approach to care.

Results from the National GP patient survey showed that 95% of patients knew what the next step would be within two days of contacting their GP practice. This was above the 92% experienced by patients locally and 93% nationally.

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.

Information about how to complain was readily available and patients could make a complaint in person or via the practice website.

Feedback from the GP national patient survey demonstrated that 94% of patients say the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last general practice appointment. This was above the local average of 84% and the national average of 87%.

The practice used the Friends and Family Test (FFT) to gather patient feedback. They had reviewed and analysed their FFT results over the last 12 months and could evidence that 91% of patients was extremely likely/likely to recommend the practice to friends and family.

We spoke with patients on the day of the onsite assessment and received positive feedback on the care and treatment people received. We also saw evidence of the practice’s commitment to patient feedback through the display of a ‘you said, we did’ board, which highlighted actions the practice had taken in response to patient feedback.

There was an active Patient Participation Group (PPG) in place, and we saw promotion of this in the reception area. We obtained feedback from 3 members of the group who told us that their views were genuinely valued and that they were meaningfully involved in shaping service improvements and enhancing the patient experience. The practice shared learning and listened to the PPG in making further improvements.

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.

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.

Feedback from the GP National Patient Survey demonstrated that 94% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last general practice appointment. This was above the local average of 84% and the national average of 87%.

The practice demonstrated a highly effective patient-centred approach to access and demand management. They had consciously moved away from a “one problem per consultation” model, recognising that this can fragment care and disproportionately disadvantage their population. Instead, they promoted continuity and holistic care, supported by a Senior GP-led escalation process that was activated when demand exceeded capacity, ensuring safe, timely decision making in line with their standard operating procedure.

Innovative systems had been introduced to optimise efficiency and consistency. The practice developed a comprehensive directory of standardised templates for responding to online requests, enabling staff to manage digital queries promptly and efficiently. Staff were highly skilled, having undergone robust care navigation training, supported by an embedded system template that provided real time prompts, structured guidance, and facilitated early identification of red flag symptoms. Reception staff received enhanced training focused not only on service awareness, but also on effective communication skills, including how to confidently “hold conversations” with patients and ensure delivery of “right care, first time.”

This model of excellence extended beyond the practice. Care navigation training was rolled out across all practices within the Primary Care Network (PCN) through a structured programme of 5 training sessions, ensuring safe, consistent, and high-quality patient signposting at scale. The approach was recognised as best practice, having been presented at both Integrated Care Board (ICB) and regional level, and subsequently embedded within the ICB’s broader access improvement strategy.

The impact of these initiatives was clearly evidenced in performance data. Between January and April 2026, the practice delivered 17,250 appointments, equating to 650 per 1,000 patients over a 3 month period which was significantly above the England benchmark of 481; while maintaining longer, 15–20 minute appointments. Their model ensured patients received appropriate care first time, with 28% of contacts safely redirected to alternative professionals or services, and a further 40% effectively managed by the on-call GP.

Access systems were highly responsive and patient focused. The practice could evidence that they managed between 4,600 and 6,000 calls per month, maintaining an average wait time of just 2 minutes. A call back facility further enhanced patient experience by minimising time spent waiting on the phone.

Feedback from patients was overwhelmingly positive. Patients we spoke with during the onsite assessment praised the quality of care and responsiveness of the service. The practice demonstrated a strong and embedded culture of continuous improvement, evidenced by a visible ‘You said, we did’ board, clearly showing how patient feedback was actively sought, valued, and used to drive meaningful service improvements.

There was an established Patient Participation Group (PPG) in place. We obtained feedback from 3 members who described being actively involved in shaping practice improvements and working collaboratively with leadership. They had supported the practice in the co-production of care navigation scripts to ensure that language used by staff was clear, consistent, and patient friendly.

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.

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

We observed staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach towards patients and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. For example, the practice was registered ‘Safe Surgery’ and supported people who were homeless, in temporary accommodation or seeking asylum. A ‘Safe Surgery’ is a GP practice with a declared commitment to addressing the barriers people face in accessing healthcare or support, including refugees. It was also ‘Veteran accredited’.

Feedback from The National Patient Survey 2025 demonstrated that 89% of respondents described their overall experience of the practice as good. This was significantly higher when compared to both the local average of 71% and the national average of 75%. Despite higher than local and national averages, the practice had completed a patient experience and care survey report and put in place an action plan for further improvements which included targeted engagement with diverse populations, optimising access and demand management, improving care coordination awareness and using data to continue to drive improvements.

Diversity and inclusion were embedded at the heart of the patient experience. The practice demonstrated a highly proactive and data driven approach, undertaking detailed analysis of health inequalities and producing a comprehensive population impact report to fully understand the needs of their population and identify areas requiring targeted support. This insight translated into meaningful, tailored interventions. For example, recognising that 8% of their population were living with 3 or more long-term conditions. The practice implemented a range of enhanced support measures, these included personalised reasonable adjustments, targeted staff training, longer appointment times, and the provision of easy read communications to improve accessibility and patient understanding.

The practice also worked collaboratively as part of a wider Neighbourhood Team, integrating general practice and community services. This partnership approach enabled the delivery of flexible, coordinated, and responsive care, ensuring patients received holistic support that effectively met their diverse needs.

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.

Leaders understood the requirements of legislation when considering consent and decision making and had access to policies to support them. We were told that the practice held multidisciplinary meetings to share and discuss information relating to patient care and treatment, for example, those on the practice palliative care register.

There were registers held for those patients who were vulnerable who were on the palliative care register or at the end of their life. We found that clinicians understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making and saw that consent was documented.

There were systems in place to ensure staff kept up to date in training relating to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty. We found that staff had completed the required training.

Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) forms were in place and available within the clinical record.