Cumberland House

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. 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.

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Data from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey showed that 86% of respondents were very positive about their overall experience of their GP practice. This was above the national average of 75%. Since the inspection, GPPS have published new results in July 2026. The new data suggests a slight improvement with 87% of people responding positively.

The service had arrangements to promote people’s privacy. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. The service performed in line with the national average in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people felt listened to and felt they were treated with kindness. For example, 89% of respondents to the survey felt the healthcare professional at their last appointment was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern. Since the inspection, GPPS have published new results in July 2026. The new data suggests a slight improvement with 90% of people responding positively.

In preparation for this assessment the CQC received feedback about the practice through our Give Feedback on Care service. People were consistently positive about the kindness, compassion and emotional support provided by both clinical and non-clinical staff. People described staff as caring, respectful, professional, approachable and supportive. People felt listened to and involved in decisions about their care. Several people reported receiving reassurances and support during periods of illness, anxiety or complex health needs. People described the practice as ‘excellent’, ‘gold star’, ‘professional, caring and friendly’, and ‘efficient and supportive’.

Reception confidentiality was raised by more than one person, who felt conversations could be overheard in the waiting area. We observed the challenges around maintaining privacy and confidentiality at the reception desk due to the layout of the reception and waiting area. Staff told us people could request to speak with staff away from the reception desk in a more private area. All but 1 consulting rooms were located away from the waiting area. Conversations could not be overheard in these rooms. Music was played in the waiting room to help promote privacy at the reception area.

Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.