Island Medical Centre

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

People’s care, treatment and support had promoted equality, removed barriers or delays, and protected their rights. Leaders and staff had 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 service had 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 had ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and had worked in partnership with them to respond to relevant changes in their needs.The latest national GP Patient Survey found that 82% of patients had stated the last healthcare professional they saw was good at treating them with care and concern, and 82% stated they were good at listening to them. In addition, 86% had stated they had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to.Care plans had reflected the physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients, including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients had been supported to understand their condition and had been involved in planning for their care needs. Patients we spoke with during the assessment confirmed they had been involved in decisions about their care.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care had been joined-up, flexible, and had supported choice and continuity. Leaders told us the service had used technology to continually monitor performance, manage health conditions, and improve access. Staff told us the service ran searches to identify vulnerable patients at high risk from poor health or isolation.

We saw the provider had worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population.

Staff from the local integrated care system stated they did not have concerns about the service. The service had been actively involved in their local primary care network, working with other services to improve local health inequalities.

The service reviewed long-term condition monitoring at their GP partners meetings, clinical team meetings and PCN meetings. The service attended multidisciplinary meetings regularly to review and improve patient care.

The latest national GP Patient Survey had found that 84% of respondents felt the healthcare professional they saw had all the information they needed about them during their last appointment. Patients we spoke with during the assessment confirmed that the healthcare professionals they had seen had the necessary information to support their care.Leaders and staff explained how they had ensured information was available to as wide an audience as possible. Staff told us they had understood people’s communication needs and gave examples of how they had provided information in accessible formats. People using the service, their families, and carers (where appropriate) had been provided with information that was accessible, safe, secure, and supportive of their rights and choices.Policies and procedures had been in place to ensure staff provided information tailored to individual needs. This had included making reasonable adjustments for disabled people, interpreting and translation services for people who did not speak English as a first language, and support for deaf people who used British Sign Language.

The latest national GP Patient Survey found that 82% of patients had stated the healthcare professional they last encountered was good at listening to them during their last appointment.

The service had carried out an independent staff wellbeing survey in June 2025, with 165 responses. The results showed that nearly 65% of respondents had felt fully involved in decisions about their care. Just over one in four had felt partially involved.

The service had made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. They had involved people in decisions about their care and had communicated what had changed as a result.

People could access care, treatment and support when they needed to and in a way that worked for them which was reinforced by an access to appointment protocol. This promoted equality, removed barriers or delays and protected their rights. Patients told us they could access clinical care when desired via different avenues. Results from the latest national GP Patient Survey showed the service had been in line with other local practices for the percentage of patients who responded positively to the overall experience of making an appointment and were satisfied with the appointment(s) they were offered. The service’s internal survey had also showed positive results in these areas.

The appointment system required patients to complete an online request form, which a clinical team member had triaged. Patients who could not complete the form had been able to contact the service via telephone or attend in person, where reception staff had assisted them. Reception staff had received care navigation training. Systems were in place to recall and invite patients for childhood immunisations and cervical cancer screening.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance.

The latest national GP Patient Survey found that 72%of respondents described their experience of contacting their GP practice as good, 74% had found reception and administrative staff helpful, and 46% had found contact through the website easy. Eighty-one percent of patients had known what the next step would be after contacting the service, increasing to 91% within two days.Staff and leaders had actively listened to information about people most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and had tailored care, support, and treatment accordingly. Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider and to CQC, had been positive. Staff had treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders had proactively sought ways to address barriers to improving people’s experience and had worked with local organisations, including those in the voluntary sector, to address local health inequalities.Staff had understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and had made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had maintained processes to ensure people could register, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff had used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

The latest national GP Patient Survey found that 91% of patients had stated they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment.

People had been given the opportunity to express their wishes regarding DNACPR and had been supported to plan their future care while they still had the capacity to do so. People’s decisions and what mattered to them had been reflected in personalised care plans, which had been shared with others when necessary. The patients we spoke to during the on-site assessment told us they had felt involved in decisions about their care and treatment.