Faversham Medical Group

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 practice ensured patients were central to their care and treatment, working in partnership with them to respond to changes in their needs.

Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The practice understood the diverse health and care needs of patients and the local community, ensuring care was joined‑up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. For example, building relationships with community groups to promote the take up of screening programmes. There were established systems for engaging with the community healthcare provider.

The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

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

Complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback. For example, staff reflected on a complaint that identified the need for improved communication processes and more checks within the appointment booking system after a patient was scheduled for a flu vaccination for which they were not eligible.

There was an established patient participation group (PPG) that held face‑to‑face meetings, supported by a wider virtual group of around 800 patients. In October 2024, the PPG conducted a survey to gather patient views about their experiences with the practice. The results showed that patients generally appreciated the friendly, kind and professional staff, while also highlighting areas for improvement such as difficulties getting appointments and challenges with the appointment system. The practice said they found this feedback invaluable, discussed the findings with PPG members, and implemented changes including recruiting additional staff and simplifying the appointment process.

Feedback from members indicated that the practice was committed to listening to concerns, and the PPG had raised issues that contributed to improvements, for example in appointment availability and prescription turnaround. While communication between the practice and the PPG was generally open, some members felt wider communication with patients could be strengthened. Members also told us that the practice’s ability to respond was sometimes limited by staffing, funding, or national requirements, though both parties continued to explore ways to improve communication with the wider community. There was recognition that the PPG could be used more strategically to support the practice and add value.

The practice made sure patients could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

There were established processes to monitor and respond to changes in patient demand for services and clinical risks. There was a triage system to assist staff to appropriately prioritise patients according to clinical needs.

Patients could access the practice in a way that suited their needs, including online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were located on the ground floor, and the entrance had a ramp and automatic door to support accessibility. The practice also had bariatric facilities, including equipment and seating, to ensure that patients with higher physical support needs could access care safely and comfortably.

The practice offered extended hours appointments from 7.30am to 8am, Monday to Friday.

During our onsite visit, we looked at the practice’s appointment system and found the next routine face-to-face and telephone appointment with a GP was 11 March 2026 and the next available routine appointment with a practice nurse was 1 April 2026. The practice told us they ensured emergency appointments were available for patients who needed to be seen urgently.

However, results from the national GP Patient Survey (2025) showed only 43% of respondents responded positively to how easy it was to contact the practice on the phone which was below the national average of 53%. Whilst 67% of respondents responded positively to the overall experience of contacting the practice, compared to the national average of 70%. The practice was aware of these results and had developed an action plan in response to these findings, which included adjusting staffing levels and roles to cover peak telephone times, improving the phone system to allow call‑back, providing clearer guidance for staff, offering patients a choice of appointment type, increasing GP capacity through recruitment and introducing Saturday clinics.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about patients who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff told us they monitored demand and access and increased capacity when needed. They also explained that they were actively recruiting additional permanent staff as part of an ongoing recruitment drive.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving patient’s experience and worked with local organisations to address any local health inequalities.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and adjusted to support equity in patient’s experiences and outcomes. For example, they offered longer appointments for patients with complex needs or communication difficulties and offered quieter appointment times for autistic and neurodiverse patients. Sunflower lanyards were available to help identify patients who may require additional support, and reasonable adjustments were made to ensure care was accessible and responsive to individual needs.

The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers.

Patients 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 patients were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.