Cranleigh Gardens 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.

The service performed better than the national average in the 2026 National GP Patient Survey. Survey results showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that met their needs, including by telephone, in person and through the service’s website. For example, 86% of respondents described their overall experience of contacting the service as good, compared to the national average of 77%. In response to feedback from people using the service, staff had made changes to improve access. This included sending cervical screening and childhood immunisation invitations by text message, with an embedded link allowing recipients to book appointments at their convenience.

At the main site, treatment rooms were available on the ground floor and a lift provided access to the first floor. A ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance to improve accessibility. All rooms at the branch site were located on the ground floor.

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 equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including voluntary sector organisations, to address any local health inequalities. For example, the patient participation group (PPG) organised a free weekly walk to encourage physical activity and help reduce social isolation.

Staff understood the importance of providing inclusive care and made reasonable adjustments to support equity in people’s experiences and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register with the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as people experiencing homelessness and Travellers.

Staff at the main site used a healthcare communication platform on a tablet to support people who did not speak English to exchange important information, such as registering with the service and booking appointments. This could also be used to support people with hearing impairments, as spoken words could be transcribed into text for them to read.

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.