The Grange 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 that the practice met patient’s needs, and that staff treated patients 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.

The practice made sure patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, working in partnership with them to respond appropriately to any 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 their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

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. Information provided by the practice met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The practice encouraged 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.

We reviewed complaint records and saw there was an established system to respond and learn from complaints. The practice acknowledged where improvements could be made and introduced changes. Patients had been updated in a timely and appropriate manner.

Feedback was gathered through multiple channels, including the NHS Friends and Family Test, a suggestion box, and both written and verbal complaints and compliments. Staff shared examples of changes made in response to patient feedback, such as introducing a quiet room to support patients in a confidential setting who needed help with the online triage form. The practice also switched to a different online triage provider following concerns raised about the previous system.

There were established processes in place 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.

The practice offered extended hours appointments every weekday until 8pm, which staff said helped accommodate specific patient groups. For example, patients who may struggle to attend during standard hours. One example shared involved a family who were able to bring their children for immunisations in the evening, making it easier for them to attend together.

The practice offered extended appointments for patients with learning disabilities to ensure they had sufficient time and support. Staff shared examples of how they adapted appointments to better meet individual needs. For example, by using simpler language, allowing extra time for explanations, involving carers where appropriate, and creating a calm, unhurried environment to reduce anxiety and build trust.

Patients reported disparities in their experiences and outcomes. Results from the national GP patient survey (2025) identified 55% of respondents responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice which was below the national average of 75%. Results also identified 27% of respondents responded positively to how easy it was to contact the practice on the phone. This was below the national average of 52%. Feedback received by the Care Quality Commission through the “Give Feedback on Care” form on its website reflected these results. Patients told us they experienced difficulties booking appointments, long phone wait times and difficulties getting a face-to-face appointment. Some patients also raised concerns about poor communication, particularly around test results and missed call backs.

The practice acknowledged this was a key concern raised by patients and in response to patient feedback, they implemented changes to both the telephone system and the online consultation tool in April 2025. The practice told us these updates were aimed at improving patient access and streamlining efficiency. We note that these changes took place after the GP Patient Survey data collection period, as a result, it’s likely they would not have been reflected in the 2025 survey results.

Feedback gathered through the NHS Friends and Family Test between March September 2025, indicated a steady improvement in patient satisfaction regarding their overall experience of the service. Positive response rates peaked at 96% in August.

The practice had processes to ensure patients could register, 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.

When patients wanted to express their wishes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation, they were supported to do so and were able to change their mind if they wished.

The provider told us they had received a national accreditation recognising high quality end of life care and had a dedicated clinical team supporting this area.