The Fairfields 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 good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care. People’s care, treatment and support promoted equality, removed barriers or delays and protected their rights.

Leaders and staff proactively sought ways to address barriers to improve people’s experience, acted on information about people's experiences and outcomes and allocated resources and opportunities to achieve equity. The practice complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes.

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. We observed staff treating people with kindness and respect within the waiting room. Arrangements were in place to promote peoples’ privacy. Staff that chaperoned patients were aware of their responsibilities in maintaining a person’s dignity and safety during an intimate examination. People’s religious needs were respected, and they could choose to see a male or female GP. The practice had processes in place for people who found it hard to access services by utilising interpreters and directing people to relevant services where they may need extra support. For example, patients in the last 12 months of their lives and people at risk of developing a long-term condition. The practice was a registered carers champion practice. The practice supported all people, including refugees and homeless people, to access healthcare. National GP Patient Survey data and feedback received from people reflected people felt listened to and were treated with kindness. For example, 84% 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 comparable with the national average of 85%.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The practice supported all people, including refugees and homeless people, to access healthcare. Staff employed spoke multiple languages such as Polish, Hindi, Urdu, Turkish and Spanish, enabling communication with people whose first language was not English who required support. We saw evidence of support tools and advice to aid patient independence and support. For example, all staff had received autism and learning disabilities training and were able to support people who found it difficult to be independent and access services.

The practice employed a social prescriber (through their PCN) to promote people’s independence and help with well-being and social problems by referring to external stakeholders. For example, weight management advice; exercise to improve wellbeing; access to services to help with social isolation such as knitting groups, and support for homeless people. Clinicians involved people in making decisions about their care and treatment and had increased their appointment times allowing time to discuss choices with the person. National GP Patient Survey data reflected that people felt involved in decisions about their care. For example, 82% 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 comparable with the national average of 91%. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. A member of staff had been appointed as a carers’ champion and there were processes in place to support this group of people.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. They used feedback from the National GP Patient Survey, the patient participation group, complaints and comments to respond to people’s needs. The practice maintained a complaints, compliments and suggestions log which was reviewed regularly with the practice team to identify any emerging trends or themes of concern and responded to these quickly. The service had introduced a new telephone system and triaged appointments. The triage system ensured people with immediate needs had access to services when they needed them. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support.Feedback from people who used the service reported positive experiences with prompt responses to appointment requests, often receiving same day appointments through the online system.

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 felt valued by leaders and that the manager and GPs were supportive and had an open-door policy should they have any concerns or queries about their wellbeing or regarding provision of the care service. Staff were positive about the support they received from leaders and staff told us they were listened to. The practice provided written guidance and resources to help staff perform their role competently and had good communications systems and updates for staff and staff wellbeing. They told us part time working arrangements enabled them to work longer hours to cover absences when needed. They also had access to and used other wellbeing initiatives such as the cycle to work scheme.