Castle Mead Medical 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 71 (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.

Results from the 2026 National GP Patient Survey showed positive patient feedback in relation to access. For example, 74% of respondents described their overall experience of contacting the service as good, which was above the national average of 73%. In addition, 65% of respondents reported that it was easy to contact the service by telephone, compared with the national average of 57%.

The service monitored patient feedback and access data to understand people's experiences and identify areas for improvement. Leaders demonstrated awareness of the importance of access and had implemented measures to support this, including reviewing access information and patient feedback as part of ongoing service improvement activity.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor with level access to the practice and an automatic external door, which could be operated both at the entrance and remotely by reception staff.

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, Patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable, such as those with a learning disability or dementia, were often offered longer appointments and appointments at quieter times.

The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs and complex medical issues. We saw staff liaised regularly with community services to discuss and manage the needs of these patients.

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 practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. The practice was in the process of becoming a Safe Surgery, which would further support registration for people who did not have a fixed address or identification.

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.