Pinfold Medical Also known as Pinfold Medical Services

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 did not always make sure people could access the care, support andtreatment they needed when they needed it.

The data within the 2025 National GP Patient Survey showed the service required some improvement in how people accessed their services. For example, 34% of people could access the service using their website compared to the national average of 58% and a local average of 54%. There had been improvements in accessing the service by telephone. 63% of people had said they found it easy to get through to the practice by telephone, compared to a national average of 57% and a local average of 53%. The provider told us on the site visit that the data from their feedback showed people were much happier when using their website and the evidence we saw showed that. For example, out of 227 people who replied to the question of how easy it was to contact the practice using their website 210 replied very good or good.

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.

The provider had the systems and processes in place to ensure staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Barriers were addressed to ensure the experience people received was good. The service worked with the local Primary Care Network (PCN) including other voluntary services to address any local health inequalities. For example, specialist mental health support.

The service had interpreting services available to people whose first language was not English, and we saw on site that where people needed somewhere private and confidential to speak with staff this was available. While all services were based on the ground floor, if people needed to see someone on the upper floors there was a lift in place that was maintained and easy to use. People could access the building easily through automated doors and was wheelchair accessible. Where people needed services outside of normal operating times, there were out of hour services available along with information about how to access the services and other support people may need.

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.