You are here


Review carried out on 17 April 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Kippax Hall Surgery on 17 April 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

Inspection carried out on 8 December 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Kippax Hall Surgery on 8 December 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led care for all of the population groups it serves.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system was in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients were positive about access to the service. They said they found it easy to make an appointment, there was continuity of care and urgent appointments were available on the same day as requested.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat and meet the needs of patients.
  • The practice sought patient views how improvements could be made to the service, through the use of patient surveys, the NHS Friends and Family Test and the patient participation group.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff were supported by management.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

We saw some areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had a system of priority booking of appointments for carers and patients who were on the palliative care register.
  • During the times staff acted in the capacity of a chaperone, they wore a tabard and badge citing ‘chaperone’ to enable patients to identify that member of staff was carrying out the role.
  • The practice had developed a visual ‘jobs to do’ board to ensure all tasks were completed in a timely manner and to avoid duplication of work. Morning, afternoon, weekly and monthly tasks were identified. The use of different coloured markers identified when the task had been completed.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice