Streatfield 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 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 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 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. Patients were also involved in decisions about their care. Patients we spoke with said they were involved in decisions about their care. The 2025 National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt listened to. For example, 94% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment, which was above the national average of 86%.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population which included a residential care home. The practice promoted continuity by having named GP allocation for patients and the coding of patients requiring the same clinician.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. The practice had translation services available for patients who required them. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records. Patients that were digitally excluded had an alert on their record.

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. We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy and learning was evident from them. These were discussed at practice meetings on a regular basis.

Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey showed 94% of patients were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment. This was above the national average 91%.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. In the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, 59% of patients found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone. This was above the national average of 53%. Despite this, the practice, as a result of the GP Patient Survey, introduced a new phone system in September 2024. This had a dashboard that had a target to answer 90% of calls within 10 minutes.

In the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, 55% found it easy to contact this GP practice using their website. This was above the National result of 51%. All patients we spoke with found it easy to book an appointment with the practice.

People could access the service to book an appointment online, in person and by telephone. The practice had a slot each day for each clinician to offer home visits for those requesting it. The practice had trained administrators for triaging patients. The practice has been involved in quality improvement project focused on access as well as several audits carried out which were focused on the appointments system. As a result of this work, the practice were able to offer appointments on the same day or next day for patients, including routine appointments.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes.

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. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation.