Waverley PMS

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 assessed a total of 2 quality statements from this key question. We have combined the scores for these areas with scores based on the rating from the January 2019 inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. Patient feedback was mostly positive about access to appointments. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

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 national GP patient survey published in July 2023 showed patient satisfaction with 4 indicators relating to equity in access to be in line with national averages. Data showed that: • 56.4% of respondents responded positively to the overall experience of making an appointment. • 56% of respondents responded positively to how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the telephone. • 59.7% of respondents said they were satisfied or fairly satisfied with their GP practice appointment times. • 66.7% of respondents were satisfied with the appointment (or appointments) they were offered. Following our site visit the national GP patient survey results for 2024 were published. The questions asked in the survey had changed from the previous year. Satisfaction with some of the indicators relating to equity in access were higher or in line with national averages, for example: • 60% of patients said they found it easy to get through to the practice by telephone. • 65% of patients said they found it easy to contact the practice using their website. • 65% of patients said they found it easy to contact this practice using the NHS App. • 54% of patients said they were offered a choice of time or day when they last tried to make a general practice appointment. Other indicators showed satisfaction that was lower than national averages, for example • 59% of patients described their experience of contacting the practice as good. • 47% of patients felt they waited the right amount of time for their last GP appointment

Staff told us patients with learning disabilities were invited for annual reviews and appointments were usually scheduled with the same GP in the same clinical room each time. Double appointments could be booked if appropriate for the patient.

We found that access at the provider’s main site was suitable for people who used wheelchairs, mobility scooters or pushchairs as there was level access to the building from the entrance. All clinical rooms were situated on the ground floor. There was a disabled toilet and baby changing area. However, the provider’s branch surgery was not suitable for people who used wheelchairs as the doors did not operate with automatic assistance, nor was there sufficient space for a wheelchair to be manoeuvred in clinical rooms. There was no disabled toilet at this site.

Feedback provided by people using the service to CQC was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

The provider told us patients could request appointments via telephone, in-person, or via the online system. Consultations were offered via telephone, face-to-face, on a video call, or by text or email.

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

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.