Registered from 31 October 2022.
GP practice · independent evidence profile
Meadowview Surgery
Ormerod House, Nelson Street, Atherton, Manchester, M46 0LE
CQC location 1-13440529241NHS organisation code P92626
A registered address may be where care is managed rather than delivered.
ODS code P92626. Data refreshed 31 August 2026.
Location and contact
Ormerod House, Nelson Street, Atherton, Manchester, M46 0LE
Use the provider website or telephone number to confirm opening times, services and whether this is the place where care is delivered.
CQC assessment breakdown
How the service was assessed
These are CQC key-question results for this location. A percentage is shown only where CQC publishes one.
Caring
The key question has not been fully assessed to give a rating
Effective
The key question has not been fully assessed to give a rating
Responsive
The key question has not been fully assessed to give a rating
Safe
The key question has not been fully assessed to give a rating
Well-led
The key question has not been fully assessed to give a rating
Latest published evidence
Ongoing Assessment for Meadowview Surgery
Assessment dated 13 May 2026. Published 1 July 2026.
What CQC reported
Date of Assessment: 18 June 2026. Meadowview Surgery is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 6,605 people under a contract held with NHS England. According to the latest available data, the ethnic make-up of the service area is approximately 93% White, 3% Asian, 1% Mixed, 2% Black and 1% Other. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation within the service population group is in the 3rd decile (3 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service population is relative to others. This was a focused assessment. We undertook this assessment due to the length of time since our last assessment. We assessed 10 quality statements from across all 5 key questions. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report. Staff kept facilities clean and maintained equipment appropriately to ensure people were kept safe. They assessed and managed the risk of infection well and took steps to control the risk of it spreading. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Staff supported people to live healthier lives, monitoring their care and treatment to ensure they received positive and consistent outcomes. Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity. People could access care, treatment and support when they needed it. Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage groups of people who used the service and sought ways to address any barriers. The service had a clear vision and strategy, which considered the needs of the people who used their service and the wider community. Staff understood their individual roles and responsibilities. Leaders accounted for the actions, behaviours and performance of staff through clear and effective governance processes. However, we identified some improvements to be made relating to prescription security.
People’s experience
As part of our assessment, we reviewed feedback from people who used the service to understand their views and experience of the service. This included speaking with people using the service at the time of our assessment and reviewing other feedback available to us. People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. They described how staff treated them with kindness and compassion and respected their privacy. This was mirrored in the results of recent surveys, including the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, which showed most people were satisfied. For example, 94% of respondents felt that their needs were met during their last consultation. There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. Representatives from the PPG described how leaders communicated well with them and kept them up to date with any changes. We received feedback from five patients which described staff as kind, caring and professional.
GP Patient Survey 2026
What registered patients reported
106 completed questionnaires · 24% response rate.
Overall experience was good
Confidence interval 84.6%–95.5%Experience of contacting the practice was good
Confidence interval 84.1%–95.2%Last appointment met the patient’s needs
Confidence interval 94%–99.7%Healthcare professional was good at listening
Confidence interval 94.2%–99.7%Healthcare professional treated the patient with care and concern
Confidence interval 92.5%–99.3%Patient had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional
Confidence interval 94.1%–99.7%Reception and administrative team were helpful
Confidence interval 92.7%–99.3%Contacting the practice by phone was easy
Confidence interval 81.3%–93.8%Contacting the practice through its website was easy
Confidence interval 65.5%–86%Survey percentages are weighted official statistics and describe the people who responded; they are not a Check My GP score or ranking. Results based on small numbers may be suppressed by the survey publisher.
Community experiences
Patient reviews of Meadowview Surgery
Personal reviews are moderated and shown separately from official CQC findings and the GP Patient Survey.
New
No approved community reviews yet.
Be the first to share a useful, factual experience.Registered scope
Services and regulated activities
Labels below come from the CQC location record and do not confirm current appointment availability.
Service types
Doctors/Gps
Regulated activities
Maternity and midwifery servicesFamily planningTreatment of disease, disorder or injurySurgical proceduresDiagnostic and screening procedures
Specialisms
Services for everyone
Published record
Rating and report history
Use the official CQC record for complete reports, regulatory action and any changes after our last refresh.
6 November 2017GoodCQC rating history
3 May 2016GoodCQC rating history
Read this profile carefully
Evidence, not a league table.
CQC findings and GP Patient Survey results answer different questions and may cover different time periods. Neither confirms current appointment availability, NHS acceptance, opening hours or whether a provider is suitable for you.
Check the provider’s own website and the complete official CQC record before making a decision. If you need urgent medical help, use NHS 111 or call 999 in an emergency.
Independent lookup: Check My GP is not affiliated with the CQC, NHS or this provider. Providers cannot pay to change their rating or position. CQC data is reused under the Open Government Licence; GP Patient Survey results are published by NHS England and Ipsos.