School Lane 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 carried out a targeted assessment of School Lane Surgery on 8 February 2024 without a site visit. Overall, the practice is rated as good. We rated the key question of responsive as good. We carried out this assessment as part of our work to understand how practices are working to try to meet demand for access and to better understand the experiences of people who use services and providers. This assessment was carried out remotely. It did not include a site visit. The process included conducting an interview with the provider and members of staff using video conferencing, reviewing patient feedback from a range of sources, requesting evidence from the provider, reviewing data we hold about the service, and seeking information/feedback from relevant stakeholders. The provider had also demonstrated how they had changed processes based upon patient feedback and would gain patient perspectives before implementing change.

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.

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 practice utilised all opportunities to create and add action plans for patient feedback. These included running did not attend reports to analyse for trends or themes. Patients were asked to contribute ideas for change and before any implementation, the provider would seek patient opinion with a "get it right first time" approach. There were 2 annual patient surveys a year, plus monthly friends and family feedback, plus the National GP patient survey.

Staff were asked to input ideas for change, pastoral support was high priority and there were 2 trained staff mental health workers to ensure staff mental wellbeing was prioritised. Staff were encouraged to give praise to each other in a positivity box and all staff feedback and compliments were published internally on a monthly basis. Staff felt valued as the provider had implemented long service awards. There were regular opportunities for staff to attend wellbeing events and the leadership would invite the staff to socialise on regular team building outings.

The provider showed they had strong processes in place to monitor, review and audit all feedback. The practice told us they were proud of their action plan and would continually use all themes, trends, suggestions and ideas to include within their action planning and keep updating this action plan with all comments given. The staff, leadership team and patients described the practice as an open and honest practice, where they felt heard and any changes made were with patient priority and included them in all decision making.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.