Mayfield 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 that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment the service was managed by a different provider and when we inspected the service, we rated this key question as good. This was the first assessment of the service under the new provider and the rating of this key question 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 service 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.

We found examples of how the service adjusted for individuals and groups of people to ensure they could access the service in a way that met their needs. We also found evidence that people were well supported to make plans about their future care and treatment, including planning for the end of their lives.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff and leaders told us the service worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its population, particularly people that were nearing the end of their lives. Delivery of services also considered the needs of people at risk of poorer experience of care. For example, an education event had been held to improve the engagement of the Nepalese community.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

A range of services were available which ensured the service met the Accessible Information Standard. For example, interpreter services, including British Sign Language, were available and all staff we spoke with were clear about how they could access these services to support people. The service’s website was translatable which supported people that did not speak English as their first language. Staff spoke a variety of languages that were representative of the local community. During our onsite visit we saw information on how to join the PPG, in the waiting area. This had been translated into prevalent community languages to promote a more diverse representation within the PPG.

The service 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.

Information about how to complain was available in the service and on the website. We reviewed 2 complaints and found both acknowledged the issue being complained about, explained the timeline for the investigation to be completed and the responses fully addressed the points raised. Leaders had recently changed the complaint management process to improve it.

The service used the NHS FFT to gather feedback from people about their experiences and staff were able to give examples of changes made because of feedback, including complaints. For example, the new online system to request care which had been introduced in January 2026. in response to feedback about people’s experiences of queuing on the phone and the lack of available appointments.

We spoke with a member of the PPG during the assessment. We heard that the PPG had not been active recently, due to the personal circumstances of some of the membership and changes in service leadership. The PPG had met with the new practice manager already and the group was actively recruiting new members. The ambition was to have a more diverse PPG, to be more representative of the service’s population including younger people, working age people and, people from underrepresented groups. Work was in progress to achieve this aim, including advertising for new members.

We heard the PPG had been consulted about the introduction of the new online request system and had offered to support on the launch day. We also heard the service listened to feedback and were open and transparent when they responded to suggestions.

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

Data reviewed as part of the assessment included the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people’s overall experience of contacting the service and the ease of contacting the service by telephone was below local and national averages. The results of whether people responded positively about their overall of contacting the service showed 53% agreed compared to 70% nationally. The results of whether people responded positively about their experience of contacting the service by telephone was 40% compared to 53% nationally. The service was already aware of these results and it matched the service’s own feedback surveys and historic complaints. The service had identified causes of dissatisfaction and made changes to improve people’s experience, including improving access to the service overall, and ensuring equity of access to care.

For example, when a new online request system had been introduced, the service had researched to ensure the system they chose did not disadvantage anyone using the service, including people without digital access. If these people attended the service in person, or contacted the service by telephone, they would be supported to make their request. Staff and leaders told us the new system had been well received by people and staff in terms of improved experience with performance improvements being monitored closely. Results from the February 2026 NHS FFT showed 94% of respondents reported a very good or good experience, although it was not possible to determine whether or to what extent, the recently introduced online system contributed to this satisfaction although we did also receive positive comments specifically mentioning prompt call backs, timely appointments and the efficiency of the service.

The service acted to ensure people most likely to have difficulty accessing care did not experience barriers. For example, we heard how the service had moved an appointment for a person with a learning disability to ensure they and their carer could attend healthcare appointments at different services. Disabled parking spaces were nearest to the entrance to the premises which was level and an automatic door had been fitted. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor as well as the first floor of the building.

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 service recognised a particular demographic of their patient population were at risk of experiencing barriers in equity of experience and outcomes due to language reasons and their cultural understanding of the healthcare system. To address this, the service delivered an educational event for patients diagnosed with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), enabling attendees to receive support alongside others from their community. The session was supported by a care coordinator employed by the service who spoke Nepalese, allowing patients to ask questions and better understand how to manage their health. Feedback after the event was that the people had felt special and valued the opportunity. Future sessions were planned for other chronic diseases including heart disease and diabetes to help with quicker detection and improved management of long-term conditions. In addition, the recruitment was designed to improve uptake of preventative screening programmes including cervical screening.

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. For example, we heard how the service used a community exercise service to support people waiting for appointments with weight loss specialists.

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 review of people’s records showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services, when necessary, for example the district nursing service and local hospice. Staff explained how the local hospice shared concerns about people so the service could respond and follow up to ensure care was provided in a timely manner. The service ensured people had capacity to make decisions about their care and where appropriate involved families in the process to ensure decisions were made in the best interests of people.