Bankfield Surgery

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 75 (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.

The service had recently introduced a digital triage and online consultation platform to support more equitable access to services and to ensure available appointments were used appropriately. All appointment requests were managed through a coordinated process involving both reception staff and clinicians, helping to ensure patients were directed to the most suitable form of care in a timely way. Patients we spoke with were positive about access and reported being able to obtain appointments quickly when needed.

Feedback from the National GP Patient Survey 2025 showed 57% of patients found it easy to contact the practice via the website compared with a national average of 51%. In addition, 50% (53% national average) of patients found it easy to get through to the service by telephone.

The service demonstrated a proactive and inclusive approach to improving engagement with health services for patients with a learning disability. Targeted events were delivered to encourage and support patients to attend their annual health checks, helping to address known health inequalities within this group. The event was coordinated by care coordinators and learning disability nurses, with good attendance from patients and carers. During the event, staff identified individual healthcare needs and made appropriate referral for example, a referral to a GP physiotherapist for one patient. Following the event, the service sought feedback from attendees through an evaluation process. This enabled the service to reflect on the effectiveness of the initiative, identify areas for improvement, and inform future engagement activities.

Systems were in place to monitor patients who did not attend booked appointments and follow up actions were undertaken to re-arrange these individuals and promote continuity of care.

Home visits were available at the discretion of a GP for patients who could not attend the surgery, ensuring their continuity of care.

Accessibility within the surgery was also noted to be good during our visit. Treatment rooms and consultation rooms were located at ground floor level, and an automatic door was in place at the entrance. Accessible parking was also available on site.

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 we spoke with showed a clear understanding of patients’ rights including the need to provide care that was respectful and inclusive of individual’s need. This commitment extended to patients, ensuring everyone was treated with respect and fairness. We observed staff providing practical and compassionate support to a patient with visual impairment, adapting their approach to meet the patient’s need and enable effective communication.

Systems were used to identify and flag patients who required accessible information, ensuring reasonable adjustments could be made in line with the Accessible Information Standard.

Staff followed clear processes to support all individuals to register with the service, ensuring no one was disadvantaged due to their personal situation. The service had also recognised potential digital exclusion and taken steps to mitigate this by offering in-person support for patients who may face barriers to using online systems. For example, iPads were available at the reception, enabling patients to book appointments on site, with staff assistance provided where needed.

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.