Shere Surgery/Dispensary

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, 89% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service was 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 reviewing and changing the length of time in advance that a prebooked appointment could be made and increasing the number of face-to-face appointments available. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door had been 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 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. For example, a doctor and nurse from the practice had recently attended an event to support people from minority groups accessing healthcare, where they were checking blood pressures and signposting women to how they could access healthcare and advice. In conjunction with their patient participation group (PPG) the practice had also provided educational events for the local community, covering topics such as men’s health. The practice identified that children were experiencing different Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) journeys. They worked with a local school’s educational support team to develop an ADHD diagnostic pathway and additional information that patients and parents were provided with to help understand the journey. This has made the process more equitable. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Flags were used in the clinical records system to identify people who were living in vulnerable circumstances. Staff ensured people were treated with dignity and respect, such as asking for name and date of birth to identify themselves rather than name and first line of their address. Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive.

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.