Leatside Health Centre

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 that 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.
The 2025 national GP Patient Survey reflected people were positive about their overall experience, felt listened to and were treated with care. The data also showed that people had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to.
Staff treated people with kindness and were aware of how they approached interactions with people. One staff member told us, “You may be the only interaction that that person has got in that day… present that smiling face, that friendly face’’.
Staff treated people with compassion. The service had created additional materials to support families who were bereaved, providing advice and resources as well as a sympathy card.
Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. In the reception area, screens intentionally face away from public areas and phone calls could not be overheard. There was also a designated area where private discussions can take place.
Staff were able to provide chaperones to people using the service.
 

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.
People’s personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. This was evidenced in people’s personalised care and support plans we reviewed. We also saw examples of where people had declined support, and their wishes had been respected.
People’s communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. Staff gave examples of how they use different communication needs for people that included simplifying medical terms, using print outs, and using text-based services.
The 2025 national GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment.
The service was accredited as an Armed Forces veteran-friendly GP service and demonstrated a commitment to supporting vulnerable groups.
 

The service was exceptional at promoting people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment, and wellbeing. People could access information in the service such as posters and leaflets, and on the service website to support them to make healthier choices.
The service’s health and wellbeing team helped people and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services, and we saw how the service worked with their patient participation group (PPG) to proactively reach out to carers and veterans during their mass vaccination clinics.
We saw case studies of how the service has used its Multidisciplinary team to support and improve people’s independence. For example, a person’s goal was to be able to independently walk to the GP practice and the team supported them to do this by arranging reviews of their health condition and arranging for additional equipment and coaching support. The person commented ‘You have really helped improve my confidence.”
We saw another person become more independent due to their mobility aids being changed during the intervention from the service. This resulted in the person being able to mobilise independently again.
 

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern, or distress.
There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.
We reviewed the appointment triage system and saw how urgent medical needs were identified and prioritised. During our site visit we saw that on the day appointments were available however, we found that people were waiting up to 7 weeks for a routine appointment. To mitigate any risks the service provided safety netting advice to people and gave examples of where people had followed this advice and contacted the service. The service had dedicated time from a GP to review people who were waiting for an appointment which meant that any changes in people’s needs were identified and acted upon. The service also was in the process of recruiting additional GP’s and a minor illness nurse following an increase in service demand.
 

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources such as a wellbeing box and facilities for safe working, such as standing desks, regular breaks, and rest areas. Staff reported being happy at work and told us how they were encouraged to take breaks after difficult calls.
Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work or needed adjustments to carry out their role, such as being given flexibility in their working hours. Staff also told us that social events take place outside of the service.