Botesdale Health 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 results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the service’s website. For example, 84% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, compared to a national average of 70%. In response to feedback from people who used the service, staff had made changes to improve access. This included the service changing their clinic times to recognise additional appointments that may benefit people who found it difficult to be seen during working hours to improve access for working people. Additional appointments were available in the evening and at weekends. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door were fitted to the entrance to ensure ease of access to the service.

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 and the Patient participation group proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, examples included collaboratively producing information leaflets for Anima, NHS app and prescriptions. The practice had trained a staff member in domestic‑violence awareness to better identify, support, and safeguard vulnerable individuals and were also veteran friendly.
Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The practice had future plans to work alongside their primary care network to host a pop up health clinic for local farmers. The practice and the PPG had an established dedicated Cancer support group.

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.