Ford 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 carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive and found: The practice made changes to, and organised services in order to meet patients’ needs. The practice used people’s feedback and other evidence to actively seek and improve access for people. Services were designed to make them accessible and timely for people including those most likely to have difficulty accessing care. The provider prioritised, allocated resources and opportunities as needed to tackle inequalities and achieved equity of access. The practice monitored data and feedback related to patient’s experiences when accessing care at the service. Where negative feedback was received or opportunities to improve were identified, the practice responded with plans implemented and changes designed to improve access, patients’ experiences, and satisfaction levels.

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.

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.

Leaders demonstrated they were aware of the challenges to patient access, made plans and were acting to improve patient access. The practice created an action plan in response to the annual National GP Patient Survey, NHS Friends and Family Test (FFT) and local survey results. We were told how these changes were assessed to make sure patients were not disadvantaged and how the impact of the changes was being monitored. The leaders explained they provided opportunities and support for different groups of the patient population to overcome health inequalities including adjustments to the registration process and to how patients could communicate the practice. They have a digital champion to help people access services using more modern technology. Feedback from staff demonstrated people in vulnerable circumstances were easily able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode such as homeless people, and Travellers. The practice recognised it was performing poorly in patient satisfaction for access. We were shown and heard about changes made including: recruiting staff both clinical and reception, investment in staff training and competencies for care navigation, call back option on phone system, patient education and availability of appointments. The practice promoted the use of their website for booking appointments and online consultation service to improve access, supported by a practice digital champion. Traditional methods of access were always available to those who were not digitally proficient. We heard about ways that the practice was working with other local stakeholders including the local Primary Care Network (PCN) to improve access to primary care. It was clear that improving access and patient experience was a priority. They reviewed data, feedback and changes made to ensure improvements would have a positive impact for their patients.

Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, through an App. and in person by visiting the practice. Appointments were available face to face, by telephone, online or as a home visit. Same day appointments were available, and patients could book routine appointments up to 2 weeks in advance. Pre-booked appointments were available on weekday evenings and at the weekend through an extended hours service in conjunction with other local GP practices. The practice had arrangements in place for prioritising patients. Staff were trained and supported by documented protocols to book appointments with members of the practice clinical team or signpost patients to other appropriate services. The practice offered appointments from a variety of clinical staff for example doctors, pharmacists, practice nurse, health care assistant, and a social prescriber. Information on how to access care out of normal GP hours was available on the telephone message system, online and at the practice. A number of quality improvement initiatives were planned and implemented to increase capacity. We saw evidence that the number of available clinician appointments offered each week was reviewed and adjusted so that it was suitable for the population need. Recruitment for additional staff was underway. The practice explained that feedback from patients was continually monitored. We were shown evidence and told that feedback from national and local patient surveys were gathered, reviewed and acted upon.

In the 2023 National GP Patient Survey, the practice results for ease of getting through to the practice by phone were negative and lower than the national average with a slight improvement in performance from the previous year. Satisfaction with appointment times, satisfaction with the appointment offered and overall experience of making an appointment were in line with the national average. Patient feedback gathered by the practice in the NHS Friends and Family Test (FFT) was around the national average. For example, in September, October and November 2023, 390 people responded to the survey with an average of 91% who were positive about the practice. England average is also 91%. Adaptations were made for those whose first language was not English and patients who had information and communication needs related to a disability, impairment or sensory loss. The practice was accessible to patients with disabilities and mothers and babies. Military veteran status was acknowledged and recorded so that patients could access specialist veteran care. We found the leaders had responded to patient feedback and were making improvements. For example, survey results indicated most patients preferred face to face appointments, therefore types of appointment offered daily were adjusted in order to provide more face-to-face ones.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.