Hatch End 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

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that 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 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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Patients we spoke with said they were involved in decisions about their care. The 2025 National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt listened to. For example, 95% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment, which was above the national average of 86%.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the service worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. In the 2025 National GP Survey, 92% felt the healthcare professional they saw had all the information they needed about them during their last general practice appointment which was in line with the 92% national average.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The Service had translation services available for patients who required it. The Practice had an Accessible Information Standard Policy which was followed. They also had interpreter services such as Silent Sounds.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. During our site visit, we saw all complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy.

In the 2025 National GP Survey, 93% of patients were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment. This was above the national average 91%.

The Service did not currently have a patient participation group (PPG) since the last Chair retired, however we saw evidence that the service was currently working towards establishing a new group and had invited patients to be a part of it via text message.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Patients could book an appointment online - via patches or email, and by telephone, or face to face at the reception desk. Patients requesting home visits would speak to a GP before a home visit could be arranged. The service used Silent Sounds as a language interpretation service and used BSL for those who required it. All appointments were given on the ground floor. Results of the 2025 National GP patient survey showed that 74% of patients found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone. This was above the national average of 53%. All patients we spoke with found it straightforward to book an appointment with the practice.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Patients requiring double appointments were offered them.

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. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation.