Whitby Health Partnership

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 the service met people’s needs, and 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.

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 service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service performed slightly below the national average in the 2025 National GP Patient Survey in relation to contacting the practice. This indicated that, while people were generally able to access services in ways that met their needs, including by telephone, in person and through the practice website, there remained opportunities for improvement. For example, 67% of respondents described their overall experience of contacting the practice as good, compared to local and national averages of 70%.

The service had identified this as an area for improvement and had taken proactive steps to improve access. For example, leaders identified that the average call waiting time was 11 minutes and, following a review of the patient call journey, reduced this to 4 minutes. They also updated the practice website to provide clearer information about accessing appointments, promoted and educated patients on the use of the online system, and focussed on improving patient-facing interactions at reception.

Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a ramp and automatic door had been fitted at the entrance to improve accessibility. The practice had systems in place to support access for people who may require additional support, including translation and British Sign Language services. The practice had also identified that proposed parking charges in the local area could create barriers to access. To help mitigate this, they worked with a local service that provides free bus travel for people aged over 80 attending medical appointments, helping them to access the practice when needed.

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

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. For example, staff had established dedicated dementia clinics, supported by dementia nurses, to support people while they waited to access further care.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive.

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.