Mount Chambers 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 looked for evidence the service met people’s needs, and 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 71 (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.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People could access the service in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or online. Arrangements were in place for people who were housebound to be seen by a clinician.

People’s views were mixed regarding access to appointments in the previous 12 months and although recent feedback remained mixed, it showed improved satisfaction. For example, results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey showed the service performed below the national averages for access indicators. For example, 27% of respondents reported it was easy to contact the service by phone, compared with a national average of 52.9%. 2026 data showed this had improved to 35%, which was still below the national average of 57%.

Leaders were aware of this and conducted frequent analyses of their performance. We saw evidence that calls received into the service had decreased in number, whilst other methods of contact had increased, but that the length of each phone call was substantially longer. Further analysis by the service showed that many of these calls were from people who faced digital exclusion or who required a more tailored service. This resulted in longer calls and therefore longer waiting times for those people who did contact the service by telephone. Leaders were implementing various options to address this situation.

The premises were accessible, with treatment rooms located on the ground floor with access for people who use a wheelchair. Interpreter services were available for people whose first language was not English, and for people with a hearing impairment. A hearing loop was also available.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff were trained in equality and diversity and had completed learning disability and autism awareness training.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances. Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who had limited or no access to the internet.

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.