The Mill Hill Surgery

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 that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has remained 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 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. Alerts were added to patient records so staff could identify additional needs or preferences.Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The practice understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so 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, for example, building relationships with community groups to promote the uptake of screening programmes. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community and healthcare providers. For example, the practice was actively involved in their local primary care network (PCN), where they worked with other service to improve the local health inequalities.

The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. We saw a variety of health awareness posters available in the waiting area. Leaders used staff and patient feedback to make improvements to the waiting area, for example there was a designated clinical station ands the practice separated health promotion information into colour coded section. We saw a variety of information available in a range of languages. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The practice involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. They made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. 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 patient participation group met regularly and members we spoke with were positive about the leaders and services.

The practice made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, they had extended appointments for people with a learning disability. The service introduced a total digital triage system as per updated guidance and people requiring immediate support were prioritised by a duty clinician (the service had maintained a 97% completion on triaging, see previous section). Telephone and in-person access for patients who preferred not to use digital routes was also available. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, there was a ramp and automatic doors on the entrance.

In the NHS National GP Patient Survey results 2025, the service mostly performed higher than local and national averages, for example:

76% said that their experience of contacting their GP practice was good compared to a national average of 70%.

68% said that it was easy to get through to the contact their GP practice on the phone compared to a national average of 53%.

92%of people who responded to theNHS Friends andFamily TestNHS Friends andFamily Testin 2025 said that they would bevery likely orlikely to recommend the practice.The practice received an average of 195 responses a month.We saw similarresponsesfor January and February2026.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The National GP patient survey found 76% of patients had a good experience overall of contacting the practice (70% nationally and 71% locally). The practice had established regular walks with their PPG and patient population which was led by one of the partners.

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 practice had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people, immigrants 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.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their care however, we found that the practice was not sharing the universal care plans with patients, but leaders reviewed and decided to rectify this. Staff had completed mental capacity act training. This information was shared with other services when necessary. The practice also offered home visits where appropriate.