Greengate 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 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.
A triage system, introduced in February 2026, was used to help ensure patients received the most appropriate care based on clinical need. Patients could submit requests through a variety of routes, including online via the practice website or NHS App, by telephone, or in person. Staff were available to assist patients who required help completing the triage process. Once reviewed by a trained health care professional, patients were directed to suitable outcomes, which included same-day appointments, appointments within a few days, pre-bookable appointments within two weeks, or referral to other appropriate services. Same-day appointments were available at the time of our inspection, and additional appointments were accessible during evenings and weekends through enhanced and extended access arrangements.
Findings from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey indicated that overall patient experience of contacting the practice was positive and above the national average. For example, 77.7% of respondents reported a good overall experience, compared to 69.6% nationally. However, patient feedback highlighted some areas for improvement, particularly in relation to telephone access, where 47.1% of respondents reported it was easy to get through, which was below the national average of 52.9%. The practice continued to review its appointment system and ways of working, including promoting access to the wider multidisciplinary team, to improve the availability of appointments and reduce pressures on telephone access. This included encouraging and educating more patients to use the practice's online app and digital services to manage appointments, order repeat prescriptions and access information without needing to contact the practice by telephone.
Feedback gathered during the inspection was varied. Some patients told us they were able to obtain appointments promptly when needed, while others expressed concerns about the reliance on the triage system, particularly digital access. Conversely, other patients reported that they found the system convenient and flexible.
The premises supported accessibility. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, automatic doors had been installed to improve entry, and parking for people with reduced mobility was available. However, we noted that the hearing loop was temporarily unavailable due to ongoing building works. The provider assured us this would be reinstated once the work was completed.
 

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 fairly and without discrimination. They demonstrated an understanding of the importance of providing inclusive care and made appropriate adjustments to promote equity in patient experience and outcomes. Systems were in place to support patient registration, including for those in vulnerable circumstances.
Staff provided additional support to patients with specific needs, including those with language or communication difficulties. Reasonable adjustments included offering longer appointments, arranging home visits, and providing appointments at quieter times of the day for patients with a learning disability. The practice also worked collaboratively with external partners, including the Primary Care Network, to support some of the most vulnerable patients, particularly older people living with frailty.
The service had systems in place to gather and review feedback from people using the service. This included working closely with the Patient Participation Group (PPG) to review feedback, including comments received through the NHS Friends and Family Test. Feedback was analysed to identify themes and trends, and actions were taken where appropriate. The practice and the PPG worked together to promote and advocate for the health and wellbeing of people within the local community.
 
 

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.