Stanmore House Surgery Also known as Dr Cockrell and Partners

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. Atour last assessment,we rated this key question as outstanding.At this assessment, the ratinghas changed to good.

This service scored 82 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The practice made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. The practice worked in partnership with people to decide how best to respond to any relevant changes in patient’s needs. Patients had access to appointments provided by a range of professionals. Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. The practice used patient feedback to identify areas for improvement and made necessary adjustments to ensure patient care was optimum. The patient participation group (PPG)were positive about their involvement with the practice and assured us any suggestions were taken seriously to improve patient care. Patients that provided feedback through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process, told us the practice were very good at considering their individual needs. The practice shared examples of the reasonable adjustments they made to comfort a needle phobic patient.

The practice understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The total triage model ensured patients received the right care with the right clinician. Specific GPs have been assigned to key patient groups, including those with dementia, learning disabilities, mental health needs, palliative care requirements and safeguarding concerns. The practice provided care for those in care homes, each care home was allocated a GP allowing patients to build relationships with a familiar clinician, this enabled GP’s to truly understand patient’s needs. Information about patients care and treatment needs was available to share between services as required. 94%of respondents to the National GP Patient Survey felt the healthcare professional they saw had all the information they needed about them during their last general practice appointment, this was higher than the national average of 92%. They tailored their services to meet the diverse needs of patients and promoted health education and preventative care initiatives. National GP Patient Survey results highlighted 72% of respondents felt they had enough support from local services or organisations in the last 12 months to help manage their long-term conditions or illnesses, this was higher than the national average of 69%. The practice had trained a salaried GP to deliver joint injections when the previousclinician that delivered this service was unavailable to ensure continued access for patients. The practice strengthened their women’s health provision as 2 GP’s had specialist training in gynaecology, allowing procedures to be carried out at the practice. Delivering these services in-house, improved continuity of care and avoided unnecessary referrals, while maintaining safe and effective treatment in a familiar setting.

The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. The practice website was available in different languages and included information about how to make a complaint. Patients gave feedback through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process and told us that they were given clear explanations about their treatment and choices in a way they understood. Patients were informed about how to access their care records.

The practice was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas. People were encouraged to leave feedback by using the Friends and Family Test. The responses were regularly reviewed and analysed to identify trends to drive improvements. The practice involved people and listened to their preferences when making decisions. Feedback could be given verbally or written. Positive changes were made following feedback. For example, the covidscreen was removed from the reception desk to create a more personable approach also avoiding patients needing to raise their voice to talk to the receptionist.

All patients were invited to join the patient participation group (PPG) when registering with the practice. The practice were passionate about listening to ‘all walks of life’ and encouraged people from marginalised groups to join the PPG to gather an insight into a wider range of views to generate further practice development. The practice held quarterly meetings with the PPG as an opportunity for the PPG to share the views of people using the service. The PPG told us they had a good relationship with the practice and felt listened to and involved in decision making. Complaints were discussed and reviewed to improve the quality of care. NHS Friends and Family Test feedback was regularly reviewed.

The National GP Patient Survey Data demonstrated that 86% of respondents felt the healthcare professional was good at listening to them, this was in line with the national average. Feedback we received through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process, reported that patients felt the nurses were very welcoming and always asked how they were and always listened. Patients reported never feeling rushed during their appointment.

65% of respondents to the National GP Patient Survey found it easy to contact the practice by telephone, which was higher than the national average of 53%. 38% of respondents found it easy to contact the practice by their website, which was lower than the national average of 51%. The practice had since added a ‘Book Online’ banner with link to the online form at the top of their website with a captivating image to draw patients to this option. 52% of respondents found it easy to contact the practice by the NHS app, which was higher to the national average of 49%. Although most access questions were above the national average, the practice wanted to further improve their access.

The practice was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The practice was open from 8.00 am to 6.30 pm Monday to Friday, with extended access on Tuesdays and Saturdays. 2 GP partners worked weekends to ensure all urgent results and prescription requests were actioned in a timely manner. We received positive patient feedback expressing how grateful patients were to receive a phone call on a Saturday. Various appointment types were available such as in person, online and telephone consultations. Pre-bookable appointments for routine issues were offered.

The practice introduced a total triage system in August 2025. This online service ensured patients in need of urgent medical review were always seen and assessed on the same day. This also reduced the phone call waiting times. The online service opened at 7am to enable patients time to submit their online form before other commitments like work and were responded too in an efficient manner, improving overall patient experience. Patient feedback through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process was positive about appointment access. Patients described the total triage system as ‘extremely effective and often got an appointment that same day.’

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff actively promoted equality of opportunity and strived to eliminate discrimination in all aspects of their work. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improve people’s experiences. For example, a sensory friendly environment was created. Health information was accessible in the waiting areas and available in different languages. The practice had processes in place to ensure vulnerable people such as homeless patients or Travellers could register at the practice. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not have access to the internet.

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. Records showed people were supported to have meaningful conversations about their end of life wishes. Staff spoke with kindness and compassion about how the information for Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms was gathered. The practice worked closely with the care home teams to ensure the ReSPECT forms were in place and up to date to avoid inappropriate hospital admissions.