Moulton 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

Staff treated people with respect and without discrimination. There was a structured system in place to clinically assess and triage patients, ensuring they were referred to the most appropriate service based on their needs. Alerts were used to highlight any specific clinical or safety considerations, helping staff provide tailored care. The service took patient feedback and complaints seriously, using them as opportunities for learning and improvement. People were actively involved in planning their care and were supported in understanding their right to decline or withdraw from treatment. 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.

Care plans considered patients' physical, mental, emotional, and social needs, including considerations related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. A review of clinical records showed that patients were supported in understanding their conditions and were actively involved in planning their care. Where individuals lacked capacity, relatives and advocates were included in decision-making discussions. We also saw evidence that people with additional communication needs were supported in a way that was tailored to them. Patients with learning disabilities received regular reviews of both their physical and mental health.

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.

The practice worked collaboratively with other services to meet the needs of its patient population, including delivering health education and guiding patients to the most appropriate services for their needs.Services were tailored to reflect the diversity of the local population, including building strong links with community groups to promote uptake of screening programmes. Staff demonstrated a strong commitment to community support, with plans for the Patient Participation Group (PPG) to further strengthen these efforts.

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

The practice provided information to encourage participation in screening and immunisation programmes in a variety of languages, ensuring accessibility for its diverse patient population. Interpreter services, including British Sign Language, were available to support effective communication. All patient information complied with the Accessible Information Standard, and patients were informed about how to access their medical records. Designated staff members were available to assist patients and provide guidance when needed.

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 reviewed a sample of complaints and found that each had been acknowledged, investigated, and responded to within appropriate timescales, in line with the provider’s complaints policy. The service demonstrated a clear commitment to learning from concerns, with outcomes and actions documented and shared during team meetings to support reflective practice and continuous improvement. Patients were provided with information on how to make a complaint through multiple channels, including the practice website and printed leaflets available in the reception area. Complaints were handled sensitively and professionally, with patients receiving explanations, apologies where appropriate, and reassurance about any steps taken to prevent recurrence.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.In response to feedback from the National GP Patient Survey and input from members of the local community, the provider identified and implemented changes to improve accessibility to the service. For example, appointment times had been extended for people with a learning disability to ensure consultations were unhurried and tailored to individual needs. The service offered flexible access routes, allowing patients to book and attend appointments online, by telephone, or in person, depending on their preference. To support physical accessibility, treatment rooms were located on the ground floor, and the entrance to the building was equipped with a ramp and automatic doors to assist patients with mobility needs.

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

People using the service provided consistently positive feedback, both directly to the provider and through CQC channels. Leaders were proactive in identifying and addressing barriers to care, collaborating with local organisations including those in the voluntary sector and to tackle health inequalities within the community. Staff recognised the value of inclusive care and made reasonable adjustments to ensure people experienced equitable access and outcomes. The provider had clear systems in place to support registration for vulnerable groups, including people experiencing homelessness and travellers. Feedback was actively gathered using accessible methods, with consideration given to language needs and digital exclusion, helping to ensure that the voices of all patient groups were heard and acted upon.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their care, including at the end of their life. In addition, our review of records showed that patients were supported to discuss and record their preferences for end-of-life care, including decisions around cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Where appropriate, this information was shared with relevant external services to ensure coordinated care. The practice had actively pursued plans to expand its premises in response to increasing demand for space. This resulted in a successful collaboration with the local council, which agreed to provide a new building. This demonstrated the provider’s commitment to its long-term vision and its determination to ensure that future service needs were anticipated and addressed