The Killingholme 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 looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

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 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 observed person centred interactions between staff and patients. Patients could access the surgery and make appointments online, on the telephone or by visiting the practice. All home visit requests were managed by the GP and undertaken by them. Dispensary staff were supportive and available to offer advice to patients.

Our review of clinical records showed patients were mostly supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care. However, we found a small number of cases where safety alerts could impact patients’ health and welfare decisions, but records did not always evidence this information had been shared.

The practice took account of feedback from patients, and the friends and family test outcomes were very positive. The patient’s participation group representative told us the GP or practice manager was always available to discuss any points they wished to raise.

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.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice was active with its local Primary Care Network (PCN) and patients were able to access remote bookings with the PCN hormone replacement therapy specialist and extended access nurse appointments.

The practice had tailored its services to meet the needs of its community, for example, due to the position of the practice within the area, the GP undertook all home visits rather than these being undertaken by other community teams which would require extensive travel.

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

A wide variety of information was available in the waiting areas including information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes, carers helpline and carers information.

The practice had access to interpreter services, and the GP spoke four languages. A hearing loop system was available, and medicine labels could be printed in large print in the dispensary.

Patients were informed how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The practice had a complaints policy and procedure, and this was displayed in reception and basic complaints information was available on the website.

We were unable to assess if complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy as the new practice manager could not locate any records of previous complaints and they told us they had not received any complaints since they were employed.

CQC had not received any concerns or complaints about the service in the last 12 months.

The patient participation group representative told us the provider would listen to any concerns raised and would act on these.

The service was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp was available at the entrance.

Patients told us they could get an appointment without delay and usually on the same day and usually with the clinician they requested. Data from the 2026 National GP patient survey showed 96.4% of patients responded positively to how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone compared to the expected 56.9%. 82.6% responded positively to the overall experience of contacting their GP practice compared to the expected 72.6%.

Home visits were available and all these requests were managed and undertaken by the GP.

Early morning nurse appointments and late evening appointments with the advanced nurse practitioner were available once a week and nurse extended hours appointments were available via the PCN.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Feedback provided by people using the service was positive. National GP survey data, 2026, showed 91.5% responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice compared to the expected 76.7%.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders 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.

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

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.

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.