Veor Surgery

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.
 

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.

The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.
Arrangements were in place to promote people’s privacy when attending the service. Staff could tell us the steps they would take to promote dignity in the event of an emergency or where people needed to be shown compassion. Staff gave examples of helping people fill out forms in private spaces or when a person came into the service visibly upset.
Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey data were in line with national averages and reflected people were listened to and were treated with care and concern. People had trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to and were involved in their care and treatment. Staff understood the needs of the population and the challenges they faced.
 

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.
People’s personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood, and their communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care.
There was a process to share electronic care records with other local health and care professionals where required.
Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey data were in line with national averages and reflected people were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. The service carried out its own feedback survey with people. This was monitored for themes, and the service took actions in relation to feedback received
The service had recognised that when it changed over to a digital triage system, there may be people within its population who needed additional support to access the service. As a result, the service had implemented support for people who struggled with literacy and may need assistance to complete online triage forms. For example, staff were able to complete triage forms on behalf or with the person.
 

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.
Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services.
The service’s social prescribing service took a holistic approach to people’s goals, focusing on what mattered most to the person. The social prescribing link worker gave an example of how the service supported the funding of a bus pass for a homeless person, so they could access their health appointments. It was recognised by the service that people had difficulty accessing transport and to promote people’s independence the service had partnered with another organisation to provide access to a vehicle.
The needs of carers were considered by the service and there were processes for recognising people who were carers and an awareness of the support that they can be signposted too.
 

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 to ensure 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. Staff gave examples of signposting people to the appropriate service such as a pharmacy or the local authority.
The service had a digital triage service that was overseen by a GP. This system ensured that where people had immediate needs, they could access services. Staff knew how to support people who displayed signs of needing urgent medical attention and were able to direct people to other services, such as an urgent treatment centre.
 

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included staff being able to access an impartial person for emotional and wellbeing support. They included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. We observed staff wellbeing to be a focus during the ‘daily shout’ as well as a staff wellbeing board. The wellbeing board also provided a space where staff members’ achievements were celebrated.
Staf told us reasonable adjustments or flexible working adjustments could be made to support staff when they were facing challenges such as personal matters or health concerns. A leader working within the service demonstrated awareness of how the demand of the service affects staff, highlighting the importance of supporting their staff group. To support staff wellbeing, leaders of the service had introduced additional wellbeing support through an independent person who can provide counselling, peer support and visits the service monthly.
Staff carrying out home visits were safeguarded by the service’s lone working risk assessment. Staff could also explain the check-in and check-out process that was followed when undertaking these visits.