Balance Street 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 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 was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. GPs maintained individual patient lists which ensured consistency and strong continuity of care.

The results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey showed that the service performed exceptionally higher than national averages. For example, 96% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of contacting their GP practice. This was significantly above the national average of 70%. The survey also showed that 85% of respondents were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone. This was significantly above the national average of 53%. On the day of our onsite assessment, we found that on the day appointments were still available to book with both GPs and nurses. If more appointments were required, receptionists told us clinicians supported them to add in additional on the day appointments to meet the demand. Pre-bookable appointments with a GP were available within 1 week. This showed that people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs for example, telephone, in person or through the service’s website.

Feedback received by the CQC showed that there was strong continuity of care with many people reporting long-term relationships with their GP and that they valued the consistent and personalised care their named GP provided. People told us there was quick access to appointments, often the same day or within 1–2 days and timely triage responses. Despite a few mixed views, the majority of comments praised rapid call-backs, timely follow-up, and clear communication pathways. People also told us there were effective online systems in place. They appreciated online prescription ordering, the appointment triage form, and use of multiple communication channels for example, text, email and telephone.

Feedback from Healthwatch showed that the practice was responsive to people’s needs, appointments were made available in a timely manner and the practice was well connected with the community it served.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor with lift access to other floors. A ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance to ensure ease of access to the building. Parking for people with mobility problems was readily available.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. The practice and its Patient Participation Group (PPG) worked collaboratively to understand the needs and experiences of the local population, particularly in relation to barriers accessing secondary care. To support this work, the PPG conducted 2 large community surveys to gather a strong evidence base. A survey of 1,267 people showed that 96% felt it was important to have a broader range of healthcare services available in Uttoxeter. Respondents identified access to diagnostic tests, specialist clinics and a minor injuries service as key priorities. A second survey (676 respondents) demonstrated significant challenges for people travelling to out‑of‑town hospitals for specialist care. Seventy‑eight percent reported travelling to Burton or Derby for appointments, with 29% needing to take time off work and additional working hours lost by those providing transport. Most respondents (70%) were living with long‑term conditions, and 94% received no financial support for travel. This intelligence demonstrated clear socio‑economic barriers and informed the practice’s work to address health inequalities.

Despite these external pressures, survey findings indicated high levels of satisfaction with the practice. Over 1,000 respondents praised the care provided by clinicians, and 954 reported positive experiences accessing appointments.

The practice continued to collect real‑time evidence on access barriers. Staff maintained a log of people who encountered financial or transport difficulties in reaching wider NHS services. This supported ongoing engagement with system partners and ensured advocacy activity was informed by current patient experience.

The PPG actively contributed to reviewing service changes and providing feedback. At its meeting in January 2026, members reported positively on the practice’s new digital triage system, describing it as efficient and responsive. They also reviewed the introduction of Artificial Intelligence Scribe technology and noted improvements in clinicians’ ability to provide more focused and patient‑centred consultations as a result.

Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service. The service worked closely with their PPG and told us they regarded the PPG as strategic partners in advocating for the health of people living in Uttoxeter. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers.

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.