- GP practice
Catterick Village Surgery
Assessment report published 27 May 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of Assessment: 17 to 24 March 2026.
Catterick Village Surgery is a GP practice which delivers services to 6,061 patients under a contract held with NHS England. The service has a branch site of this main location at Colburn Surgery (Easton Way, Colburn, Catterick Garrison, DL9 4GA).
The National General Practice Profiles state the population of Catterick Village Surgery consists of 93.36% white, 3.18% Asian, and 1.26% Black patients, with less than 1% of patients mixed race, and 1.23% of another ethnicity.
Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 8th decile (8 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others.
This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the practice, the context the practice was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.
We rated the key question of safe as requires improvement.
The provider did not complete appropriate risk assessments of their facilities to ensure they were clean, safe and well-maintained. They did not store waste safely. Staff did not always take appropriate action to safeguard vulnerable patients. Staff recruitment documentation was not comprehensive and was difficult to access. However, there were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. The practice had a good learning culture. Staff could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. Staff made sure medicines and treatments were safe for patients and met their needs. The practice worked well with partner organisations to ensure safe care for patients. Staff were alert to signs of patient discomfort and knew how to respond if a patient’s health suddenly deteriorated.
We rated the key question of effective as good.
Patients were involved in the assessments of their needs. Staff took account of people’s communication, personal and health needs when reviewing their assessments. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure patients understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. When a patient did not have capacity, staff involved people important to the patient (such as family, friends and carers) to ensure decisions made were in their best interests.
We rated the key question of caring as good.
The practice was good at treating people with kindness and compassion. Staff treated patients as individuals and supported their preferences. They worked hard to help patients retain their independence. Staff responded quickly and appropriately when patients needed help. People had choice in their care and treatment. Staff protected the privacy and dignity of patients. The practice supported staff wellbeing.
We rated the key question of responsive as good.
The practice was good at ensuring patients (and the people supporting them) were involved in decisions about their care. They made sure patients could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People were supported to consider their wishes about care at the end of their life. The practice understood the diverse health and care needs affecting their patients and the local community. They worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of their patient population. The practice worked to eliminate discrimination. Patients received fair and equal care and treatment. The practice proactively worked to reduce health and care inequalities. However, the practice did not always provide clear and up-to-date information. Patients did not know what to expect if they wanted to complain.
We rated the key question of well-led as requires improvement.
The provider did not ensure effective governance processes were in place to ensure appropriate oversight of all areas of their service. They did not complete regular audits to evaluate and improve their practice. They did not maintain appropriate personnel records for staff. However, leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive. Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on openness, respect, compassion, and accountability. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Leaders worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. Staff told us there was a positive culture at the practice which ensured dignity and respect for patients.
We found a breach of regulation in relation to good governance.
We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
Patients were mostly positive about the quality of their care and treatment provided by Catterick Village Surgery.
Recent results from the national ‘GP Patient Survey’ showed patients were satisfied with the service they received from the practice. The survey found that 80% of patients described their overall experience of Catterick Village Surgery as good. This was higher than the national result of 75%.
Patients also provided feedback directly to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) via email or telephone. Feedback we received was mostly very positive.
One patient told us, “Every time I’ve spoken to the reception team, they’ve been an absolute pleasure. They’re always so friendly, professional, and genuinely helpful. I’ve seen quite a few of the doctors and nurses as well, and they never make me feel rushed. […] They take their time, they listen, and they’re so supportive and welcoming. It really puts me at ease and makes such a difference to how comfortable I feel being there.”
Another patient said, “I feel that the care I have been given at the surgery has been outstanding. I am a long-term patient […]. The care that I have been given is second to none. I am always greeted warmly from the receptionists to clinical staff. I think that the drop-in service is brilliant. I always know I can get help if required.”
The practice had a patient participation group (PPG) which represented the views of people using the service. Leaders met with PPG representatives every 6 months.
Feedback from the PPG included that, “In general, patients find that the surgery works well for their needs, and they receive excellent treatment from a caring team.”
We reviewed recent information shared by Healthwatch (an organisation which acts as champion for people using health and social care services). We did not identify any concerning trends.
Although patient feedback showed many people like the ‘sit and wait’ same day appointment service available at both practice branch sites, some negative feedback we received highlighted this did not meet the access needs of all patients.
One patient said, “The appointments that this surgery offers does not support people who work full time!”
Another patient told us, “My concern relates to the ability get appointments. The only option to see a GP is to attend a drop-in clinic. This is fine if you are ill (although waiting 3 hrs in a crowded waiting area is not healthy) but if you want to discuss a non-urgent health care issue you are not able to ring up and book an appointment within 3 weeks.”
This feedback indicates the appointment system in operation does not benefit all patient population groups and staff do not always proactively inform patients of the late evening and weekend routine appointments available via the ‘Better Access’ service.