Cam & Uley Family Practice Also known as The Orchard 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

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. There was a process to clinically review and triage people and refer them to the appropriate service to meet their clinical needs. The practice had a system which alerted staff to any specific safety or clinical needs of a person using the service. The practice took complaints and other patient feedback seriously and learnt from them to improve the quality of care. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive the care offered.

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 practice made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of people including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs.

The practice understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community and there were established mechanisms for engaging with community healthcare providers. For example, staff worked with the local GL11 community centre to support people living with a mental health condition, to access counselling and support.

Staff told us they provided people with advice and information in a way that helped them to understand their health needs. Where people’s needs could not be met by the service, staff referred them to the appropriate service. There was a system for staff to access interpretation services to support people who did not have English as a first language. The practice website contained information about accessibility. For example, how to request large print or easy read documents or if there was a requirement for a British Sign Language interpreter.

The practice made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

The practice ensured that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed in a timely manner. The practice undertook patient surveys to assess the quality of care provided. While the practice did not specifically ask people about equity in access, the majority expressed satisfaction with the overall service. Staff were supported by clear guidance to aid decision-making. Both staff and leaders demonstrated an understanding of the local population’s needs and had adapted the service accordingly. Staff also reported that they actively created opportunities and provided support to help different patient groups overcome health inequalities.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and 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 organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

Clinical staff used the Resuscitation Council Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) to assess and support people in reaching decisions about end-of-life care. We saw people’s wishes and views had been sought and respected. We saw information had been appropriately shared with local health providers who potentially needed to access this.