Southlands Medical Group

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 outstanding. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 80 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

The percentage of respondents to the National GP Patient Survey who responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice, was 96.4%, while the national average was 76.7%. The practice scored highest from 39 local GP practices for this score.

Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. The results for patients who stated that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern was 98.2% compared to the national average of 86%.

The practice told us they receive over 500 NHS friends and family test results each month, with consistently high levels of patient satisfaction. Around 98% of respondents rated their experience as either very good or good. The most common positive themes were patients being able to obtain appointments, the helpfulness and friendliness of staff, and the quality of care received from clinicians.

The practice provided us with analysis of 11 compliments they had received in the last year. These included emails and cards. They praised staff for going above and beyond their role, being supportive, caring and professional. Many staff were mentioned by name as being exceptional in their care.

We received 1 item of patient feedback via our Give Feedback on Care facility during our assessment. This was wholly positive.

The members of the patient participation group (PPG) told us they were extremely satisfied with the care provided by the practice. The practice were said to go above and beyond in caring for patients.

We contacted a care home where the practice had patients as residents. The care home manager told us the practice were very responsive and caring for their residents and they had a good relationship; nothing was too much trouble, particularly when a resident was unwell.

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.

The practice proactively identified patients who were vulnerable or at risk of social isolation and worked collaboratively with local organisations to provide additional support. Feedback from patients consistently demonstrated high levels of trust and confidence in the clinical and non-clinical team.

In the most recent National GP Patient Survey, the percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who stated that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment was 99.4% compared to the national average of 91.6%.

Last year, the practice reorganised the care of frail patients and care home residents after appointing its own clinical pharmacist.

In the care homes served by the practice, fortnightly ward rounds and multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings were conducted, enabling regular holistic reviews of residents' care needs. Practice data showed that, over the previous 12 months, 78.3% of patients had received a structured medication review, compared with a local average of 49.2% and a national average of 52.5% (Source: NHS England metrics data 2025/26).

Consistent oversight by the practice clinical pharmacist and care home lead enabled the identification of medication administration and record-keeping discrepancies. These were investigated and escalated appropriately, resulting in improvements to safeguarding, medicines management, care planning and practices within the home.

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 practice had carers champions who were trained to support carers and be aware of where to refer them for extra support.

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 that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. The percentage of respondents to the National GP Survey who responded positively to the overall experience of contacting their GP practice was 93.5%, compared to the national average of 72.6%.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.

The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

We received consistent and overwhelmingly positive feedback from staff about working at the practice. Staff were proud of the organisation and spoke highly of the strong, positive culture and how they were valued. There were high levels of staff engagement and development. Staff were actively encouraged to raise concerns.

Staff told us that there was a good team of staff who cared and helped each other. There were regular staff social events which helped keep staff spirits high. This in turn supported them to give good care to patients.

Staff gave us numerous examples of where they had challenges in their personal lives and at work. The management at the practice had given them exceptional support, advice and assistance during these times. Staff said that nothing was ever a problem to the management in terms of supporting them.

We were told that managers were very supportive with ongoing learning and development of staff and helped them to progress their careers. They ensured they had the best training available.

Staff gave us examples of where they were listened to by management. They were supported to be able to be flexible with time off, they asked for 15-minute appointments for patients, new clinical rooms, staff training and to employ more female GPs.