Penistone Group PMS Practice

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

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

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. Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

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. For example, the service held regular multi-disciplinary team meetings to discuss patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable, these were attended by other professionals like Health Visitors, School Nurses and MacMillan nurses.

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

The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to 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. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had made changes to the appointment system and in June 2025 had implemented an on-line total triage system. Those who could not complete an appointment request on-line could do so by telephone or in person and the reception staff would support them. All appointment requests were triaged the same day by a GP. Initial monitoring by the provider showed a 48% reduction in telephone call volume, 15% reduction in call waiting times for those trying to get through on the telephone and a 33% reduction in DNA’s (did not attend) appointments. The provider was also monitoring patient feedback via the national Friends and Family test and reported this had started to be more positive about the new system. Treatment rooms were accessible on the ground floor.

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. Feedback from patients, both to the provider and the CQC, was largely positive. Friends and Family Test data showed consistently high satisfaction, with 95% positive responses in July 2025 (371 responses). As part of this assessment, feedback provided to the CQC regarding the quality of care was predominantly positive. A few mixed comments were noted, primarily concerning the accessibility of the new online system. During the assessment, we observed staff assisting patients at the reception desk by guiding them through the process of booking appointments using the new system. 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. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

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 records review 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.